× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



This post received a lot of answers pertaining to the possibility of the two programs involved running in different activation groups.

Now that it has been affirmed that that was the case, I would ask :

When would it be advisable to explicitly compile a program to run in the default activation group, particularly when named activation groups are being used?
Why not systematically compile so that the program runs in the same group as the caller?


-----Message d'origine-----
De : rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] De la part de Simon Coulter
Envoyé : jeudi 29 avril 2010 01:02
À : RPG programming on the IBM i / System i
Objet : Re: How to get called program to write records to
physical file member.


On 29/04/2010, at 6:27 AM, Bryce Martin wrote:

So when I did the OVRDBF, (which I agree is kludgy),


I wonder how you and Scott arrived at this conclusion? The
ability to change the file being processed, change the
attributes of that file, and even change the records
processed by a program via correct use of OVRxxx or in
conjunction with OPNQRYF is simply brilliant. It can, and
frequently did, make programming much easier than it might
otherwise be and most (perhaps all) other platforms have
nothing like it. Unix file redirection is a poor substitute.

Just because newer methods of accomplishing similar ends
exist now (e.g., EXTFILE to replace a simple redirection
override, or SQL to replace OPNQRYF) doesn't detract from the
original great idea.

One could even argue that the newer alternatives are less
flexible because now the program itself needs to know what's
happening--the changes are not as transparent to it the way
they are with OVRxxx.
EXTFILE results in much tighter coupling than OVRDBF.

I would not discount using the alternatives when appropriate
but I would never say that OVRxxx is a kludge.

Regards,
Simon Coulter.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
FlyByNight Software OS/400, i5/OS Technical Specialists

http://www.flybynight.com.au/
Phone: +61 2 6657 8251 Mobile: +61 0411 091 400 /"\
Fax: +61 2 6657 8251 \ /
X
ASCII Ribbon campaign against HTML E-Mail / \
--------------------------------------------------------------------



--
This is the RPG programming on the IBM i / System i
(RPG400-L) mailing list To post a message email:
RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change
list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l
or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:
Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.