Re: Setting on *inlr in a service program's module..

It is doubly pointless. It has zero effect as LR is not considered in a NoMain. Also any files declared Static would be unaffected even if did have any effect.

It should be removed as all it can possibly achieve is to confuse future maintenance programmers.

I'm actually a bit surprised that the compiler doesn't flag it - I guess it figures it is just one more indicator for when 99 aren't enough <grin>


Jon Paris

www.partner400.com
www.SystemiDeveloper.com

On Nov 10, 2017, at 3:29 PM, Robert Rogerson <rogersonra@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi all,

Is there anything wrong with setting on *inlr in a module in a service program? I never do this, I just code a return. But I'm reviewing a colleagues code and I honestly don't know if it's wrong to set on *inlr, or if it doesn't make a difference.

The procedure in question has 3 files which are defined a static. My understanding is that by coding static the file(s) are opened when the procedure is first called and remain open until explicitly closed or the activation group ends. So by setting on *inlr in the procedure is this going to close the file(s) which would defeat the purpose of coding the files as static?

I'm not sure if it is a bad practice to set on *lnlr in a subprocedure or it doesn't really have any affect on performance.

Thanks,

Rob

--
This is the RPG programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries) (RPG400-L) mailing list
To post a message email: RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l
or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at https://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.

Please contact support@xxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related questions.

Help support midrange.com by shopping at amazon.com with our affiliate link: http://amzn.to/2dEadiD