Re: /if, /define, binder language

<double-snip>
| > by defining all prototypes of a SP to your program, does
it bind all
| > functions from the SP even if you don't use them?

| And, what does this topic have to do with binder
language?!
</end double-snip>

It is a related question, wondering whether "extra"
prototypes that including with nested /COPY's but not used
in the program, would result in object-size-etc. overhead in
the compile.

But a little addendum to the list of uses of /IF and
/DEFINE, like Tom, I use it to include or ignore code,
depending on whether I'm testing. I add one element by using
a /COPY ENVIRO. This source member has one statement. In the
test library list, it has /DEFINE DEVELOPMENT, or  /DEFINE
TESTING. In the production library list, /DEFINE PRODUCTION.

Saves me from having to define it on every compile, or
remembering to change the source every time. This way
sometimes programs compiled in development testing carry a
little bit of extra baggage, but (we can always hope that)
it will not hang around very long in either Development or
Test. Besides, like John Sears said once when talking about
performance, if you have a performance problem, it's more a
memory problem (as in get more) than a subroutine problem.

- Alan