What are the diffs between CLP and CLLE

[Guest.Visitor]

What are the differences between CLP and CLLE ?And the advantages of using one and the other ?

[David Abramowitz]

On Friday, September 25, 1998, 09:57 AM, Sílvio Santos wrote: What are the differences between CLP and CLLE ? And the advantages of using one and the other ? The major advantage of CLLE is that an ILE MODULE can be created. Two disadvantages are compile times that are many times longer than CLPs, and an inability to produce an accurate dump. David Abramowitz

[Guest.Visitor]

On Friday, September 25, 1998, 09:57 AM, Sílvio Santos wrote: What are the differences between CLP and CLLE ? And the advantages of using one and the other ? Moving from CLP to CLLE is part of converting to ILE. When we write new programs or new CLs we make them ILE. When we do any maintenance on a program or CL we make them ILE. Most of the converted CLPs, required no change. There were some exceptions. The TRFCTRL command is obsolete under ILE. I ran into two CLPs that used this command. There was no real reason for them to use it. I was able to replace them with CALL commands. Second, commands such as STRCMTCTRL and OVRDBF have SCOPE options. If you want an OVRDBF command to apply to just the current call level and below, use a SCOPE of CALLVL. If you want the OVRDBF to apply to the entire job, use a SCOPE of JOB. The SCOPE options can also be set for individual ILE activation groups. We create an activation group for each ILE application in a job, so CL commands can be SCOPED to a single application in a job. If you use the STRCMTCTRL command, you will most likly want to add a SCOPE of JOB to it. If you do not have the SCOPE option, it only applies to the DFTACTGRP, or OPM programs. Once you start creating ILE programs, you will need a SCOPE of JOB to include the ILE programs under commitment control. CLLE has also has some advantages in programming. CLLE modules can be bound into ILE programs. CLLE and ILE programs can be loaded into the same activation group so the program is not re-initalized on return to the CLLE. Under OPM a program was re-initalized on return to CLP. In ILE, a program is reinitalized on return to a program from a different activation group. So, if the CLLE and ILE program are in the same activation group the ILE program is not re-initalized on return to the CLLE. Usually CLLEs are in a different activation group than the programs they call. If you compile a CLLE with option 14 on PDM it goes into the DFTACTGRP. Your ILE programs are usually in a different activation group. So, on return to the CLLE the program is re-initalized, just like in OPM. Are you converting to ILE? JHicks@SUZ.com

[Guest.Visitor]

One thing I like about CLLE vs CLPs is that since I like to have a CL front end on programs, I only compile the CL with a named AG and then all my RPG programs use AG *CALLER. Simplifies things. Brad <A > HREF="http://prairie.lakes.com/~bvstone/"><IMG > SRC="http://prairie.lakes.com/~bvstone/images/sig.gif"></A></P>