× 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.


  1.  Home
  2. MIDRANGE-L
  3. March 2014

RE: Comparing two RPG pgm objects - Are these two objects the same?

Mark,

DSPPGMREF is showing a difference, this is probably from the copybook.
Number of objects referenced . . . . . . . : 3
Number of objects referenced . . . . . . . : 5

Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mark S Waterbury
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 5:02 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Re: Comparing two RPG pgm objects - Are these two objects the same?

Paul:

Even with the same source member, and the same copy books, other things could have been "different" such as the *LIBL at compile-time -- so, for example, some externally described files that are used by this program could have a new or different definition with many more fields, thus causing the RPG compiler to generate lots of extra code to move all those fields into and out of the corresponding local variables, for example.

If you have both program objects on your system, issue DSPPGMREF against each of them, and look carefully at the record format level IDs shown for any FILEs referenced.

Good luck,

Mark S. Waterbury

On 3/5/2014 4:49 PM, Steinmetz, Paul wrote:
Source date/time matches.
Compiler and earliest release matches.

The source for this RPG object includes a copybook, which we were told was the same.
However, if the copybook WAS different, would that explain the difference in Size, MI, and ODT, correct?

Source file change date/time . . . . . . . . . . : 10/09/12 15:40:57
Source file change date/time . . . . . . . . . . : 10/09/12 15:40:57

Compiler and earliest release matches.

Compiler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : 5722WDS V5R4M0
Earliest release that program can run . . . . . : V5R2M0

Compiler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : 5722WDS V5R4M0
Earliest release that program can run . . . . . : V5R2M0

Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rich Loeber
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 4:35 PM
To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Comparing two RPG pgm objects - Are these two objects the same?



When we ship code to our customers, we normally compress *PGM objects (and others) to reduce data transfer time during download. That could explain the size difference if one is compressed and the other has been decompressed by the OS.

I go with the earlier suggestions of comparing the source code date and time and checking to make sure that both have been compiled to the same target OS level.

Rich Loeber
Kisco Information Systems
http://www.kisco.com[1]
-------------------------

Quoting "Steinmetz, Paul" <PSteinmetz@xxxxxxxxxx>:

John,

Same for both.
Optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : *NOOPTIMIZE

Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John Yeung
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 4:20 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Re: Comparing two RPG pgm objects - Are these two objects the same?

On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 4:06 PM, Jon Paris <jon.paris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The same compiler at different PTF levels _might_ account for the
difference but it seems a bit of a stretch. The size of static and
MI stream seem to be too big a difference to me for PTF levels to
account for it.
Would it be too big a difference for different optimization levels to
account for it? (Just a shot in the dark here.)

John Y.
--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L)
mailing list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To
subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take
a moment to review the archives at
http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L)
mailing list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To
subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take
a moment to review the archives at
http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.




Links:
------
[1] http://www.kisco.com

--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe,
unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.


--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...
Follow-Ups:
Replies:
Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

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.