Re: Why do procedures require DFTACTGRP(*NO)?

["alan" <steelville@xxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jon Paris" <Jon.Paris@Partner400.com>
To: <rpg400-l@midrange.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 12:30 PM
Subject: Why do procedures require DFTACTGRP(*NO)?


| As to performance of subprocedures vs. subroutines, in
practice it can be a
| wash.  Because subprocs take parms, you don't have to move
large blobs of
| data into the fields expected by the subroutine.  That can
more than
| compensate for the small overhead.  Even if the overhead
was huge I'd still
| want my programmers to justify why they _didn't_  use a
subprocedure rather
| than the other way round.


Didn't I read in the ILE manual that it has something to do
with protecting the default action group and OPM from some
of the performance enhancements that come from using the
action groups?

If I remember correctly, procedures used in a named (or
*NEW) action group are kept more "at the ready" for another
call, for faster execution of subprocedures, but that at the
last exit of the last program call to that action group, it
all goes away. Yes? Or?

- Alan