RE: binding directories

[Joel Fritz <JFritz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Looks to me like the fog is the result of thinking too hard. <g> I agree
with Scott, binding by reference is a good way to go in most situations.
The question you should ask yourself about bind by copy vs bind by reference
and other ILE stuff is "what's in it for me?"  A lot of it is related to
housekeeping and ease of maintenance.  A surprisingly small part of it is
performance.

In the CL case, if the CL is a script that sets up the environment for and
then calls the programs in a batch job, I'm not sure using CLLE is any
advantage.  You would probably be just fine with the CL executing dynamic
calls.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Smith, Mike [mailto:Mike_Smith@RGCResources.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 8:03 AM
> To: 'rpg400-l@midrange.com'
> Subject: RE: binding directories
>
>
> ok, the fog is starting to clear a little.
> but as i said, i'm thick headed.
> first, i thought that the idea was have everything for 1 program bound
> togeather, and it seems, that if you do a crtbndrpg on the
> module, and then
> do a crtpgm , that that is not happening- or am i missing something?
>
> second.
> suppose now i have clpgm1, pgm1, srvpgm1 and srvpgm2.  does
> that change
> anything.
> would i crtbndcl, crtpbndrpg, crtpgm.  - assuming i missed
> something on the
> above- how does the cl get bound together with the rest of
> the program?
>