RE: ILE philosophy

[Rich Duzenbury <rduz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> It IS static binding.  Dynamic binding is accomplished by CALL.
Of course, you are correct.  In my mind, resolving a reference to a
function in a service program at runtime doesn't really qualify as my idea
of how 'static' _should_ be.  I'm trying to adjust to the ILE terminolgy as
I go.

Once the AG ended, calling the program again caused the crash I had been
expecting.


> What's happening here is directly related to the activation group you've
> chosen.  This directly influences your idea of what 'next run' means.  A
> program or service program never goes away for a job until the activation
> group it's running in does.  So if your program runs in QILE and your
> service program runs in *CALLER, it too runs in QILE.  It gets activated
> (hence the name) exactly once: the first time it's called for that AG.  So
> the program hasn't ended unless the activation group it ran in has ended.
Got it.  Thank you.


> Read the chapter on activation in the ILE concepts and it might make more
> sense now that you've seen it in action.
RTFM?  Shucks.  Oh, all right, if I have to.

Regards,
Rich