RE: Optional parameters

["Dennis Lovelady" <iseries@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> I would agree it's a valid technique ... but if you're worried about
> the consumer of your procedure passing an invalid number of parameters,
> then I would say it's more of a risk that they pass in totally invalid
> parameters.
>
> In the end (IMO), if you're worried about the procedure being called
> with the wrong number of parameters ... you have bigger problems to
> deal with.

Just something I've seen in the past; I cannot even remember the exact
circumstance. What I do remember is that the idea was to combine all the
parameters, and when the routine was developed, that count was twelve (one
per month).

Now, any attentive programmer who has taken the time to visit the routine
will actually modify the IF statement (or possibly remove it - I did not).
So one could argue that it was unnecessary and even obscure.  OK, but the
point is to make sure that the routine was fully studied.  And remember: not
all failure conditions are caught in testing.

Regards,

Dennis Lovelady
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dennislovelady
--
"Never do card tricks for the boys you play poker with."
        -- American Proverb