Re: binder language, binding directories, bind bycopy/reference

Aren't you mixing the SIGNATURE and the PGMLVL parameters?
 
The way I've always don binder language is like this:
pgmlvl(*current) signature(mod2)
procA
procB 
procC
procB2

pgmlvl(*prv) signature(mod1)
procA
procB
procC

pgmlvl(*prv) signature(initialVersion)
procA
procB

Joe Lee

>>> bmorris@xxxxxxxxxx 06/19/2003 10:48:34 >>>
Jon Paris wrote:
> 
> There is one point Scott omitted from his excellent summary on
Binder
> Language.
> 
> When you add new procedures you should always add them _to_the_end_
of the
> list. Do not be tempted to be "tidy" and add them in alpha (or any
other)
> order. If you do not follow this simple rule, really interesting
things can
> happen!
> 

Given that you have to keep the procedures in the same order in all
the
lists, why is the *CURRENT/*PRV method preferred over the hard-coded
signature method?

For example, this might be your entire binder source when using a
hardcoded signature:

signature('SRVPGMNAM')
procA
procB
procC
procB2

This would be your entire binder source when using *CURRENT / *PRV

signature(*current)
procA
procB 
procC
procB2

signature(*prv)
procA
procB
procC

signature(*prv)
procA
procB

I just don't see the attraction of the second one.

_______________________________________________
This is the RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries (RPG400-L) mailing
list
To post a message email: RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx 
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l 
or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx 
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l .