So why would you want to have two binding directories for one program?
Does your service program binding directory contain all service programs
- so it is shared among programs and service programs alike?
If not, keeping them separate seems completely arbitrary to me, and I
don't see the benefit it provides.
My experience with binding directories has really been a 1:1 situation -
1 directory for 1 object.
[mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Barbara Morris
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2008 12:19 PM
Subject: Re: Question about service programs
Bob P. Roche wrote:
How does having to remember to name all modules, every time you
recompile simplify things? If it is in the binding directory, and you
have that listed in your H spec. It seems simpler to me. The compiler
will just find it.
I think it's ok to have modules in a binding directory, _but_
- the binding directory should _only_ have modules
- that binding directory should be used in the H spec of
_only one_ source member (the source member used for the
A separate binding directory should be used for any _service programs_.
So, say you have PGMA which has modules PGMA, MODB, MODC, then you could
have a binding directory called PGMA listing modules MODB and MODC. The
H spec for PGMA would have BNDDIR('PGMA') and it might also have another
BNDDIR keyword to pick up service programs.
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,
or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at