×
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.
Barbara Morris wrote:
If
either RPG+COBOL or CL had changed how they handle 1 byte
character/indicator return values, it would have required a recompile of
all existing programs.
I've felt that CL could be more flexible than that. We've seen
plenty of new commands and command parameters over the years, not to
mention new data types. I wouldn't have been at all surprised to see
a new parm added to CALLPRC that simply returned the value differently.
Or a new RtnVarAs() parm that defaulted to *PREVIOUS behavior, but
allowed a new value of *RPGV6R1 (or whatever) to described _how_ a
value should be returned. Developers could choose how/when to
convert existing code.
Anyway, it seems to me that many possibilities could have handled a
transition with minimal need for recompilation. Or is the ILE CL
compiler too different from OPM to allow it?
Tom Liotta
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.
midrange.com
