Re: New program call model and V6R1 -- RPG400-L

Subject: Re: New program call model and V6R1
From: Scott Klement <rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 20:08:29 -0600
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l>
List-help: <mailto:rpg400-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: RPG programming on the IBM i / System i <rpg400-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:rpg400-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l>, <mailto:rpg400-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l>, <mailto:rpg400-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

Hullo,

Hmmm. Ok, I get it. I would have thought the behavior would have changed
with the NPM. So what we are saying is that using a named activation group
and the cycle it will reinitialize the variables but not free them.

With regard to global variables (static variables in the main procedure) yes, you are right on target.

Static variables in subprocedures would not be reinitialized (just as with the new MAIN keyword -- which is often advertised as "having a main procedure that acts like a subprocedure")

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2025 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.