× 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.


  • Subject: Re: Bound RPGLE or Module/PGM RPGLE!
  • From: "Scott Klement" <infosys@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: 24 Oct 1999 23:58:52 -0500

Hi,
     Internally, CRTBNDRPG and CRTRPGMOD/CRTPGM do the same things.
I can't really say that one or the other of these approaches is
better or worse than the other.

>From the standpoint of being able to keep things organized and easy
to maintain, the binding directory approach might be easier, since
you can group related service programs, and compile everything that
uses that type of functionality the same way...

However, you can use binding directories in EITHER scenario...
since they can be used on the CRTPGM (option 26) as well as CRTBNDRPG
(option 14)

If you intend to keep your module objects around so that its quicker
to recompile things, the CRTRPGMOD/CRTPGM (option 26) approach would
facilitate this.

Those are the pros and cons that I can think of...  However, from
the standpoint of actually running your program, the compiled
*PGM & *SRVPGM objects will be identical, either way...

Have Fun...



"Neeta Kantepudi" <neeta@kantepudi.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I like to know the advantages/disadvantages of creating a Bound
> RPGLE program or two step (Module and PGM) when there is a CALLB for
> a module which is in a Service program.  The Service program is
> added to a Binding directory.
>
> I have created the object by using option '14' from WRKMBRPDM by
> assigning a named Activation group and the name of the Binding
> directory, where the Service program is defined.  This way I have
> generated only one object.
>
> My colleague advises me to create the program as a Module first, and
> then use option '26' to create the program from WRKOBJPDM.  Instead
> of specifying the Binding directory, the Service program name is to
> be specified in the create prompt.
>
> I am not sure whether both the processes serve the same purpose or
> specifying the Service program has advantages over the Binding
> directory.
>
> Your comments are appreciated.
>
> Robert
+---
| This is the RPG/400 Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...


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.