Those who still programme monolithically probably don’t feel the need for this. But anyone who uses multiple classes with multiple methods knows that it’s normal (and even desirable) to change your mind about the name of these things. Ideas aren’t born ready-made in our heads. Ideally, code is mouldable and can be shaped until we find the desired form.
Every time you switch contexts, you lose the thread slightly. It’s human nature. So the less you do, the better.
I read somewhere that Eastern mathematicians tend to solve a different kind of mathematical problem than Western mathematicians do.
This post is addressed to the collective character that represents all the people who have told me that they like some things in the new 7.4 functional syntax but think that you shouldn’t overdo it and should avoid using REDUCE and all the other unnecessarily weird things because the code gets more obscure, it’s slower and they don’t see any advantages.
Are you serious?
We used to use the APPEND and INSERT commands to add rows to internal tables. Now that ABAP has grown, we can use VALUE, REDUCE, CORRESPONDING, etc. But what if the internal table already has rows and we don’t want to lose them?
A while ago I showed you that you could SELECT from an internal table. And then I asked myself: if that is possible, shouldn’t INNER JOIN be possible too?
You Ain’t Gonna Need It means Do what you want, but don’t say I didn’t warn you. Just kidding. Not really.
Did you know that your ABAP programme can copy content to your operating system’s clipboard?
Man, this is one of those endless discussions that will never get anywhere. Ditto trying to decide if you deserve to go on living if you put pineapple on your pizza or Philadelphia cheese on your sushi.
If you want to call the SM30 from a program you can use CALL TRANSACTION but there is a simpler way.
