|
Gary, >The question was, why do it differently? > >How about security for one thing. I suppose that could be true, but I have not had a scenario where that was the case -- or at least where I realised it was. <g> What scenario did you have in mind? >Depending on design, it might be advisable to use named AG for cleanup >reasons. I haven't used JNI yet, nor anything else where I wan't able to control the activation group of the caller. So it hasn't been an issue for me. Yet. ;-) >One module per zervice program - hard to do when you have RPG and CL >(one example) code you want to include in a service program. I guess I live a sheltered live. All of my service programs so far have been strictly RPG. Maybe I should consider some CL's using RTVxxx commands where my usual MO is just to call an API. Doug
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.