Late to this, but I use includes with code in two situations: 1. As standard library pieces managed through a pre-compiler, usually for platform-dependent sections. For example, I have standard includes for getting command line arguments, reading and writing from ini files and so forth. The precompiler builds versions of the code for each supported platform (Universe, UniData, D3, QM etc) by pulling in the required blocks.
I also make the same code available as subroutines (that have the same includes), but as I have a lot of utilities it's easier for me if each of them if relatively stand-alone and I can send them out without the need for any supporting code. 2. For self-initializing named common blocks. I use these extensively with web and GUI development, as it means I don't have to assume any specific start-up routine or entry point - I can just include the declaration and know it will be valid whatever piece of code is hit first. These are usually of the format: COMMON /SOMECOM/ prefix.PARAMS(SomeSize),prefix.INIT If prefix.INIT = @False Then .. go and initialize it, e.g. set params to empty, open files etc. prefix.INIT = @True End (remember that named common is initialized to zero i.e. @false not to empty). For example, a lot of my older green screen routines have a clipboard function and cursor handling. So I have a CLIPBOARD named common which needs to be set to empty to begin with, and a TERM named common that defines the terminal settings and keys, initially as a set of defaults then by reading overrides from an INI style record. They will be initialized by whatever routine uses either of them first, without having to call a start-up routine on login if they aren't going to be used. Brian -----Original Message----- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Baker Hughes Sent: 07 February 2012 23:05 To: U2 Users List (u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org) Subject: [U2] Including Code - A Best Practice? A friendly discussion arose recently among some U2/MV Developers about whether to include code. If any of you have opinions about the positive aspects or negative aspects of this practice, please respond. Should it be adopted as a best practice, or rejected as special situation use only? Many shops probably include long sections of variable assignments, or perhaps globally opened files. This is pretty much accepted everywhere as a good practice. In question here is the insertion of actual code - business logic or screen I/O programs or code snippets. Maybe you know of methods to overcome some of the obvious downsides: unintended reassignment of local variables, difficulty in debugging, others. What are the positive upsides? Performance gains? What is the longest snippet you think should be included, if allowed? What advantage has included code over a CALL or a Function? Reuse. What else? Can the downsides be mitigated satisfactorily to justify the gains? Thanks so much. -Baker ________________________________ This communication, its contents and any file attachments transmitted with it are intended solely for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential proprietary information. Access by any other party without the express written permission of the sender is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this communication in error you may not copy, distribute or use the contents, attachments or information in any way. Please destroy it and contact the sender. _______________________________________________ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users _______________________________________________ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
