Re: Call back procedures

[Charles Wilt <charles.wilt@xxxxxxxxx>]

Correct, it's just another bound call...no performance difference.

The only catch I can think of is common sense when once you think about it....

For any given group of procedures you intend to call via a call back,
they need to have the same interface (number of types of parameters).

HTH,
Charles

On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 2:05 PM,  <Rick.Chevalier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> A question has been raised about performance.  Have you noticed any performance issues?
>
> It seems to me that it would be just like any other bound procedure call.  The target is already in memory.  I would just be making a call based on an address.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Alan Campin
> Sent: Friday, May 08, 2009 1:02 PM
> To: RPG programming on the IBM i / System i
> Subject: Re: Call back procedures
>
> I have done a ton of them. Didn't really have any issues. Just like any other procedure. It is just being called on the call back instead of through the normal methods.
>
>
> Privileged and Confidential.  This e-mail, and any attachments there to, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain privileged or confidential information.  If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify me immediately by a return e-mail and delete this e-mail.  You are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail and/or any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited.
> --
> This is the RPG programming on the IBM i / System i (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.