Re: Optional Parms in Sub Procedure -- RPG400-L

Subject: Re: Optional Parms in Sub Procedure
From: Barbara Morris <bmorris@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 17:44:45 -0400
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 \(AS/400 and iSeries\)" <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>

On 9/20/2013 4:57 PM, Rory Hewitt wrote:

...
I guess I hoped that the RPG compiler would recognize that a large return
parameter is defined and would optimize it 'under the covers' to do this,
without the need for a specific keyword.

It could do it under the covers if it was a non-exported procedure and it didn't check %PARMS.

But it couldn't do that if the procedure was exported since both caller and callee have to use the same mechanism. The large-return-value problem comes up most often with string-handling procedures, and those tend to be exported from service programs.

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.