RE: lifetime of a static variable

[Jon.Paris@xxxxxx]

 >> The question remains, whether or not it was designed to work this way,
is this the way it ought to work?

Since by now there are many hundreds (if not thousands) of programs that
rely on this behavior, the question is somewhat academic since IBM couldn't
change it even if they wanted to.

I happen to think that the design is fine.  One of the design points for
ILE was to give the programmer more control and that's what you have here.
This behavior is only a "problem" when you are running in the default AG
where only signing off will get rid of the AG (and hence the variables).
It is normally recommended that you do not run "real" ILE programs (i.e.
those using subprocs, service programs, etc.) in the default AG anyway for
exactly this kind of reason.

+---
| 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
+---