|
I was wondering if we were the only ones who occasionally (well hardly ever) installed programs with bugs. My code excepted. <g> The only reason I can think of to compile with no debug info would be to prevent people from seeing the source. I can't imagine a situation where the disk space occupied by program objects would be a real concern although my imagination is not as good as it could be. > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Mildenberger [mailto:Smildenber@Washcorp.com] > Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 8:09 AM > To: 'rpg400-l@midrange.com' > Subject: RE: **Debug options** > > > I guess we aren't as lucky as you because we do find errors > after code has > been put into production :) Sometimes it is necessary to > debug against the > production data. > > Scott Mildenberger > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Sunil Ramakumar [mailto:Sunil_Ramakumar@USSWI.COM] > > Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 8:56 AM > > To: 'rpg400-l@midrange.com' > > Subject: RE: **Debug options** > > > > > > Hi Scott, > > > > I am not sure, I understood you clearly, when you said > > putting the compile > > listing in the program object. Also is there any need to > > debug a program > > after it is moved to production. What I mean is we move a program to > > production only after removing the errors. ( that is won't > > there be only run > > time errors - if at all- any when the program is into production ). > > > > Sunil > >
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
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.