Problem with passing pointers is that you can't use prototypes to defend against incorrect data tpye/length being passed. It is rarely essential to use pointers unless using a procedure pointer - so why do it?

I'd rather risk having the internal proto of the router have pointer type definitions and have multiple protos for callers which define the way things look. That way there's only one place that requires the programmer to be aware of what he's doing - and that's the router - as it should be.


Jon Paris

www.Partner400.com
www.SystemiDeveloper.com



On 9-Oct-09, at 10:00 AM, rpg400-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

The boss doesn't like the way the router juggles with the parameters and organizes 4 different call types.
The argument is, if everyone just passes two pointers and receives two pointers, you won't have to think about how to pass the parameters.

Come to think of it, in that case, why not just pass everything with one pointer instead of 2.


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...


Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2025 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.