Re: Using opdesc ... getting CEE0502 -- RPG400-L

× 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.

Mark S. Waterbury wrote:

Why not just pass one more parameter to your "procname" procedure, with
the size of that other parameter (in this case, a data structure)?

That requires that I change the caller ... which I would like to avoid.

Using opdesc should let me determine the length of the variable being passed in.

There is some "overhead" when using operational descriptors ...

There's overhead in everything ... IMO the flexibility of opdesc outweighs the performance hit.

I can understand using CEEDOD with some APIs or "exit points" of some
other vendor product, over which you have no control, and when the
source code might not even be provided or available. But, to use it
within your own code, or as a part of product(s) you are supporting and
maintaining or enhancing, I am not sure this is really such a "good
idea"... _unless_ you are creating "APIs" that your customers will be
calling?

My routine is called from a number of locations in my code ... not all of which I am currently modifying. It's much easier to change the internals of a routine than the prototype.

david

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.