Re: Explanation

[Scott Klement <rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Kurt,

Yeah, we've gone off on a tangent from your original question.

As others have already explained, with regard to your original question, 
you either have to mark the parameter (i.e. the entire data structure) 
as const or not const.

Passing the changable field in a separate parameter is about your only 
option.

FWIW -- I don't know of any programming language (Java, PHP, C, C++, 
etc) where you can pass a whole data structure (or object) so that the 
called routine can change some parts but not others.

Sorry for any confusion, though... we went off on a tangent discussing 
the "const and I really meant it" idea.

Good luck to you.


On 6/18/2012 2:04 PM, Anderson, Kurt wrote:
> Though in my response I was referring to changing the parameter
> directly.  There is still no way that I know of.  Passing a global
> variable into a parameter and then changing that global variable in
> the procedure is bad coding, in my opinion.  As is the scenario of
> passing a DS subfield as Const then passing the entirety of that same
> DS as not Const.