On 9/11/2010 8:18 PM, Ralph Versteegen wrote:
On 12 September 2010 09:16, James Paige<[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 05:06:22PM -0400, Mike Caron wrote:
On 9/11/2010 4:27 PM, James Paige wrote:
I keep forgetting about BYREF. I know when to use it on ints, and I know
never to use it on strings, and I know it is utterly and completely
irrelvant on arrays
But what I can't remember is whether it matters for UDTs
You generally want to pass UDTs BYREF, especially if you want to modify
the UDT in the sub. You can pass them BYVAL, but:
1. They will be read only (it passes a copy)
2. If the UDT is big and passed around frequently, it will be
considerably slower than passing BYREF.
But doesn't -lang deprecated pass them BYREF by default or something?
That would explain why all the many times I have forgotten to specify
BYREF on UDTs has not broken anything (that I have noticed yet).
---
James
UDTs by default are always passed BYREF, in all dialects, so I'd
rather we didn't specify BYREF.
What I didn't realise was that Option Byval changes UDTs to pass BYVAL
by default! Argh! How could the FB devs be so cruel to us! :(
You know, in most languages, UDTs are passed BYVAL BYDEF- er, by
default. Like, in C for example.
Besides, wouldn't you want it to be consistent everywhere?
On the whole our code will be cleaner if we explicitly pass all UDTs
BYREF, declare Option Byval everywhere, and then remove all the
explicit BYVAL passing of integers. But I'm a bit less motivated to do
so now.
_______________________________________________
Ohrrpgce mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.motherhamster.org/listinfo.cgi/ohrrpgce-motherhamster.org
_______________________________________________
Ohrrpgce mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.motherhamster.org/listinfo.cgi/ohrrpgce-motherhamster.org
