Re: Activation groups - named vs. *NEW

At 03:02 PM 9/20/2002, you wrote:

Folks, I just found an excellent reason for using named activation groups as
opposed to *NEW or *CALLER (my mainstays) in certain situations.

Just for the purposes of discussion ... wouldn't it be a reasonable
approach to use *NEW for the main entry point into a system (main menu,
command processing program, published API, etc), and then *CALLER for
everything else (I'm not exactly sure what the best thing to do with VCP's
and Prompt override programs)?

That way your given a new AG when your application starts, the AG is used
by all subsequent program calls, and it's discarded when the main
application ends.  If another program starts up afterwards, you don't have
to worry about stale data still hanging around, but you still get the
advantage of using activation groups while you're application is active.

I do admit to an imperfect understanding of activation groups, named or
otherwise ... and have been bitten by then in the past.

david