Optimizing an automatic storage error

 >> However, procB still passes the xml string as input via a 65K const
varying which may now have become the culprit when we optimize the
application. Your advice on the best coding practice for declaring the
procedure interface would be appreciated.

I'm not sure there is a "best" practice for this kind of scenario <grin>.
If indeed the allocation of temporary storage is the problem, I'd be going
after IBM to fix it - or at least explain it!  Hopefully now that they are
back from celebrating Canada Day, Hans or Barbara will be able to comment on
this.

In part the various work-arounds depend on the requirements for the input
parm.  If only fixed length fields are passed, I would tend to use
Options(*VarSize) without the varying or const keywords and either pass in
the length of the field using %Size or use descriptors to determine it.  If
varying fields are required, then you could use the technique that you have
applied to the return value on the input side as well (i.e. eval parm =
input) but it is not terribly efficient.  There are various other options I
can think of but they are pretty obscure.

I think IBM need to tell you _why_ it doesn't work as is and then armed with
that knowledge you can craft a solution (or wait for the PTF!)

Jon Paris
Partner400
www.Partner400.com