RE: Writing Commands given an ILE World

["DeLong, Eric" <EDeLong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Bill,

Given the nature of user commands, I can't say I'd worry about it.  CL
programs are rarely optimized for performance.  I see these types of job
utilities or maintenance routines as being more of a convenience than as an
integral part of an application.  I'd hardly expect any command processing
program to behave like a component of an application, leaving its files and
resources open for the next call, and I'm not sure I'd trust one that
did.... <G>

Eric DeLong
Sally Beauty Company
MIS-Project Manager (BSG)
940-898-7863 or ext. 1863



> -----Original Message-----
> From: bill.reger@convergys.com [mailto:bill.reger@convergys.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 1:44 PM
> To: Midrange-L@midrange.com
> Subject: Writing Commands given an ILE World
>
>
> I have always really liked having user-written commands to do
> utility-type
> functions.  The ability to run them from a command line and also from
> within a CL program was always very handy and understandable.
>  Especially
> since AS/400 programmers use the OS/400 commands all the time.
>
> However I am finding that commands are becoming a bit limited
> as one writes
> more and more ILE functions.  Because a command always runs a CPP (the
> operative word being the last "P" for Program), you are getting the
> performance issues inherent in CALLing programs rather than using a
> subprocedure (or a module) as you would if the command was a
> subprocedure
> instead.  And since most commands are designed and written
> for one-pass
> use, they (usually) open and close their files every time they're run.
>
> All of this seems to be a performance penalty when a command
> is used over
> and over.  Any comments or opinions?
>
> Bill