Would like to be able to define private, internal parameters in the .fnc file. This would allow a business analyst to define simple logic cases in the .fnc file which could then be utilized and extended in the code that is generated from the .fnc file.
It would also be good to consider defining a way that input parameters could be referenced in values passed in to these internal parameters.
An example of the proposal is shown below:
<function name="MyFunction" rcsversion="$Revision: 1.2 $" rcsdate="$Date: 2004/08/05 12:30:37 $">
<description>A simple sql function example.</description>
<input>
<param name="gender" required="true" type="gender">
<description>Gender</description>
</param>
</input>
<output>
<resultcode-ref name="NoVowel" />
<param name="msg" required="true" type="_text">
<description>Return msg</description>
</param>
</output>
<!-- example internal processing -->
<internalparameters>
<sql-command>select 'Hello ' || title || '${personLastName} of ' || dept from employees where lastname=${personLastName}
<sql-command/>
<internalparameters/>
</function>
In my opinion the suggested change is not in line with the separation XINS makes between specification and implementation. SQL commands are implementation-specific.
I see your point, though. But I suggest this is resolved using bootstrap- or runtime-properties for your API implementation. There you can stick the SQL. Then, inside your implementation, you can use a Shared Instance to execute all SQL in the same manner.
If you have an objection to this RFE being closed, please suggest elaborate and suggest an alternative approach.
I propose deleting this RFE.
This RFE is not related to web services