Re: explicit close

["John Taylor" <john.taylor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Scott,

I use a combination of your approach, and Bucks.

Each SrvPgm contains an initialization and a clean-up procedure. The file
open logic is contained in the initialization procedure, and the close logic
is in the clean-up procedure. Both are exported, though rarely used by the
caller.

Every one of the "GetCustName" type procs makes a call to the initialization
procedure before doing anything else, in order to make sure that the
required resources are available. However,  none of them call the clean-up
procedure. They leave all resources open when they return.

How the resources are closed depends upon the type of caller. If the caller
is designed to run in a named or *NEW activation group, then I rely upon the
destruction of the activation group to close the resources. However, if the
caller runs in the *DFT ag, or QILE, then I handle resource clean up within
the program itself.

Regards,

John Taylor
Canada

----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Mildenberger" <Smildenber@Washcorp.com>
To: <RPG400-L@midrange.com>
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2000 15:56
Subject: RE: explicit close


> Buck,
>
> I know your response said typical I/O functions but what is your
> opinion on functions such as GetCustName or ValidStation that aren't
> obviously doing any I/O?  The user of the function doesn't really know if
> files are open/closed (nor should they care).  I tend to take the approach
> that the files used in a service program are USROPN and they are opened by
> the first procedure that uses them.  I usually just leave the file open
> unless it is a file/procedure that isn't typically used very often.  I
know
> this can leave a number of files open in interactive jobs but I haven't
> noticed any problems with this, although that doesn't mean there aren't
any.
> Thoughts anyone.
>
> Scott Mildenberger
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Buck Calabro [SMTP:buck.calabro@aptissoftware.com]
> > Sent: Friday, August 25, 2000 2:36 PM
> > To: rpg400-l@midrange.com
> > Subject: RE: explicit close
> >
> > I would say that typical I/O functions have at least 3 sub-functions:
> > Open,
> > Get (or Put) and Close.  This way the caller is in control and there is
no
> > "secret" open or "cleanup" done by the I/O function.  Lurkers should
take
> > the opportunity to add their comments to this - especially contradictory
> > ones!  There is no one "right" way, there are only better or worse
choices
> > for your application.  The more ideas you hear about, the better you can
> > decide for yourself.
> >
> >
> +---
> | 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
> +---
>

+---
| 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
+---