|
<double-snip> | > by defining all prototypes of a SP to your program, does it bind all | > functions from the SP even if you don't use them? | And, what does this topic have to do with binder language?! </end double-snip> It is a related question, wondering whether "extra" prototypes that including with nested /COPY's but not used in the program, would result in object-size-etc. overhead in the compile. But a little addendum to the list of uses of /IF and /DEFINE, like Tom, I use it to include or ignore code, depending on whether I'm testing. I add one element by using a /COPY ENVIRO. This source member has one statement. In the test library list, it has /DEFINE DEVELOPMENT, or /DEFINE TESTING. In the production library list, /DEFINE PRODUCTION. Saves me from having to define it on every compile, or remembering to change the source every time. This way sometimes programs compiled in development testing carry a little bit of extra baggage, but (we can always hope that) it will not hang around very long in either Development or Test. Besides, like John Sears said once when talking about performance, if you have a performance problem, it's more a memory problem (as in get more) than a subroutine problem. - Alan
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.