× 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.


  1.  Home
  2. RPG400-L
  3. September 2009

Re: declaring a file local to a sub-procedure

Nope - nothing special. Which is why using STATIC for the file is probably a good idea if the recursive capabilities are not needed.

In many cases I think the ability to pass a file in as a parm to a subprocedure or program will be more useful for generic routines than being able to have the file local to the subproc.


Jon Paris

www.Partner400.com
www.SystemiDeveloper.com



On 29-Sep-09, at 2:19 PM, rpg400-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

This now brings up an additional question, since this works along the same
way as a USROPN, how much additional overhead does this generate? I mean,
if you include a file locally to a procedure and that procedure is invoked
for every order, the overhead for opening and closing that file could be
huge.....

Or does IBM preload the file so the overhead is lower on subsequent opens?


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...
Follow-Ups:
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.