Re: MSGCON vs. MSGID?

Using MSGID, message text is resolved at runtime (WRITE/EXFMT). With MSGCON,
message text is resolved at compile time. Performance is better using MSGCON
as there is no time taken to lookup/insert the message text at runtime.

Although there is a slight performance 'hit', generally speaking, I prefer
MSGID. I liken it to using external database files versus program-described
files. The MSGFILE/MSG is external to the display file. You can make changes
to the message without necessarily having to revisit the display file.

If NLS (National Language Support) is an issue, MSGID is definitely the way
to go. By providing national language versions of the *SAME message file,
you only require one display file. (Of course, there are other issues to
address such as allowing sufficient space to accommodate the different
translated strings...)

>Greetings!
>
>Does anyone know if there are any pariticular advantages to using
>MSGID in a display file instead of MSGCON for displaying constants?
>
>Thanks!
>
>david




+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to "MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com".
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---