Re: Parameter prototype question

[Barbara Morris <bmorris@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Rory Hewitt wrote:
> ...
> However, if you *don't* have CONST specified, you always have to move the
> value from the 10P 0 field into a 5P 0  work field to pass it to the
> procedure. Since that process (before you've even called the procedure) will
> stop you from passing a value that's > 99999, then the procedure call itself
> will never fail. ...

It's true that the procedure call won't fail, but you've just shifted 
the problem to the assignment statement where you set up your 5P variable.

If the 10P variable has a value bigger than 99999, you will get an 
exception no matter how you try to pass it to a 5P parameter.  The 
exception will happen either when you copy it to your own 5P variable to 
satisfy the non-CONST parameter, or when the compiler copies it to its 
5P temporary for the CONST parameter.

So you not only have to manually verify every CONST or VALUE parameter, 
you also have to manually verify every assignment.  Or, to put it 
another way, if for some reason you don't need to manually verify every 
assignment, you shouldn't need to verify CONST and VALUE parameters either.