×
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.
On 2011/1/13 7:32 AM, dieter.bender@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
there are very few cases binder language might be usefull:
- binding multiple modules to one SRVPGM
I don't see how a one-module-per-srvpgm rule helps to avoid binder language.
If you are willing to recompile all the programs when you change a
service program, then you don't need binder language no matter how many
modules are in the service programs.
But if you want to avoid recompiling all the programs, then it isn't
sufficient to have only one module in each service program. You also
need to limit it to only one exported procedure per module. I think the
awkwardness of binder language is trivial compared to the awkwardness of
a constraint that only allows one procedure per module.
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
