If you are one of those who insert the values directly in code instead of using constants, then read no more and go and stand over there in the corner on punishment for 1 hour to learn not to be lazy. If you’ve come back from punishment or you usually use constants, then please continue reading.
Imagine using the following constants:
CONSTANTS: C_BUKRS_ESPANHA TYPE BUKRS VALUE '1111', C_BUKRS_FRANCA TYPE BUKRS VALUE '2222', C_BUKRS_INDIA TYPE BUKRS VALUE '3333', C_MODE_ERRO TYPE XFELD VALUE 'E', C_MODE_INFO TYPE XFELD VALUE 'I', C_MODE_WARN TYPE XFELD VALUE 'W'. START-OF-SELECTION. CASE l_bukrs. WHEN C_BUKRS_ESPANHA. txt = 'Hola'. WHEN C_BUKRS_FRANCA. txt = 'Bonjour'. WHEN C_BUKRS_INDIA. txt = 'Namaste'. ENDCASE. WRITE txt.
As you can see there are two groups of constants which would ideally be grouped together, and they are not. They can be grouped as follows:
CONSTANTS: BEGIN OF C_BUKRS, ESPANHA TYPE BUKRS VALUE '1111', FRANCA TYPE BUKRS VALUE '2222', INDIA TYPE BUKRS VALUE '3333', END OF C_BUKRS, BEGIN OF C_MODE, ERRO TYPE XFELD VALUE 'E', INFO TYPE XFELD VALUE 'I', WARN TYPE XFELD VALUE 'W', END OF C_MODE. START-OF-SELECTION. CASE l_bukrs. WHEN C_BUKRS-ESPANHA. txt = 'Hola'. WHEN C_BUKRS-FRANCA. txt = 'Bonjour'. WHEN C_BUKRS-INDIA. txt = 'Namaste'. ENDCASE. WRITE txt.
Thus, the declaration makes much more sense because the constants are grouped logically. The use is almost identical. It is so obvious. Yet, I only discovered that this can be done a few days ago.
Thanks to suki suk for the photo.
Greetings from Abapinho.