× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



Have you thought about EXPORTing and IMPORTing the record? 
Instead of passing it back and forth, via ptr or by value, what about just
using the PREFIX keyword on the File spec for the file in question, then
creating an externally described file that is QUALIFIED (the DS name is the
same as the qualified prefix used on the PREFIX keyword on the File spec)
and then adding EXPORT to that DS.  On the other side, you only declare the
DS, also externally described and qualified, and included the IMPORT
keyword.
They now share the same memory space.
Of course this only works in two situations.
1) Bind by Copy
2) Between a program and a *SRVPGM when the *SRVPGM's ACTGRP is *CALLER or
the same named activation group as its caller.


-Bob Cozzi
www.RPGxTools.com
RPG xTools - Enjoy programming again.

-----Original Message-----
From: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Walden H. Leverich
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 9:04 AM
To: RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries
Subject: RE: Passing a pointer as a parameter.

>and that's why I was trying to avoid a second
>read, 

Granted I'm jumping in late here, but are you doing all this passing
truly just to avoid reading the same row in the table in 2 programs? In
some _extreme_ cases that might be worth it, but if these two reads are
going to occur at nearly the same time, (pgm a reads, does a couple
things, calls pgm b, pgm b reads) then you've got a _really_ good chance
that the row is still in memory so the "read" isn't going to cost much
at all. 

Sure, in absolute terms it will be "slower" to do the additional read,
but unless you're doing this on a really undersized box, or doing is
millions of times in a job I doubt you'd ever see the performance
difference -- and if you're doing it a million times it should be in
batch so who cares if the job runs an extra 10 seconds. 

Consider such pathological coupling of programs seriously before you do
it -- you're making is much more difficult to reuse Pgm B since anything
that calls it must now know how it works.

JMTCW.

-Walden


------------
Walden H Leverich III
Tech Software
(516) 627-3800 x11
WaldenL@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.TechSoftInc.com

Quiquid latine dictum sit altum viditur.
(Whatever is said in Latin seems profound.)



As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

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.