×
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.
Literals will be handled by the compiler...the reason for Bruce's
"feeling" is IMO ease of maintenance. If the literal is defined in
every program every program will have to be modified before recompiling.
Having the literals defined in a common copybook you only touch the
copybook to make the change and then just recompile the programs that
reference the copybook...you can't imagine the time this would save...
Thanks,
Tommy Holden
-----Original Message-----
From: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[
mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Kent Hohlen
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 9:26 AM
To: RPG400 (E-mail)
Subject: Re: Benefits of declaring literals in D-specs
A couple more questions.
Bruce, you said you thought having literals within the executable
portion of
a program should be avoided. Are there any facts to base your opinion
or is
just the way you feel? If it is your feeling, why do you feel this way?
I
personally agree with your feeling, but I don't have any reasons to
backup
my feeling.
Does anyone know (I'm looking your way Barbara Morris) if there is any
performance impact, good or bad, for declaring all literals in the
D-specs?
My feeling is the system would only have to interpret the literal once
when
it is declared in the D-spec, but maybe this is handled by the compiler
and
isn't an issue.
Kent Hohlen
Eagle Window And Door
midrange.com
