Re: Debug (was Look-ahead function)

Hans:

Can you tell what are the other differences between DBGVIEW - *SOURCE and *LIST
besides *SOURCE using the current source member.

1.  Is one better than the other?

2.  Does *LIST make the programs size awfully big?  Does it keep all the /copy,
ext ref etc.?

3.  Do they make a difference in the program load time?

4.  Does the new H options *SRCSTMT, *NODEBUGIO behave differently with the two
options?

5.  Which one takes longer to compile? (I found the *LIST longer but my mileage
maybe fake...)

6.  In the same note, on CISC (poor V3R2 types), is it better to have the
optimize set to *NONE or  *BASIC or *FULL

7.  Which optimize option creates the module faster?  (I have tried all the 
three
and get no meaningful difference.)


Hans Boldt wrote:

> Mark:  I don't know how to address using the debugger from a
> different invocation level.  However, if the source is not available
> on your system, compile with DBGVIEW(*LIST).
>
> Hans Boldt, ILE RPG Development, IBM Toronto Lab, boldt@ca.ibm.com
>
> >> Is there a replacement for the DEBUG opcode?  Is there a way to put an ILE
> >>pgm into debug mode without using the interactive debugger?
>
> >The replacement for the DEBUG opcode is the interactive debugger!
>
>  There are some problems (usability and showstoppers) I've found w/ the
> interactive debugger.  The main one is that it can't be invoked from a
> different invocation level.  This is most evident when trying to debug an
> application being run from a menu program.
>
>  Another problem is that you need the source.  If you don't keep the source
> on the production box, you're in trouble!
>



--
Thank You.

Regards

Dave Mahadevan.. mailto:mahadevan@fuse.net


+---
| 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
+---