Re: ILE Concepts

[Jon Paris <jon.paris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

We're just going to have to agree to disagree.  I don't see the equivalence.


Jon P.

> On Nov 2, 2022, at 3:49 PM, dieter@xxxxxxxxxxxx <dieter.bender@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> <Jon>
> " (it's only using procedure names, not parms)" - At run time (which is what you were talking about) it is using the slot number compiled into the program at creation time. That is why it is critical when managing multiple signatures to realize that the _only_ one that really matters is *Current.
> </Jon>
>
> my statement was:
> "- errors will be forced to activation time as far as the compiler could do (it's only using procedure names, not parms)"
>
> I was talking about the compiler and this is using the names of the exports. Using export *all and doing all needed rebinds will prevent most runtime errors, wich are related to export/import.
>
> Adding exports to the end of the binding list and faking the signature is the same as adding new fields to the end of a table record and faking the format level id with levelcheck no and avoiding some rebinds is not enough to do so.
>
> D*B 
> -- 
> This is the RPG programming on IBM i (RPG400-L) mailing list
> To post a message email: RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l
> or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at https://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.
>
> Please contact support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related questions.
>
> Help support midrange.com by shopping at amazon.com with our affiliate link: https://amazon.midrange.com