Re: Why program in MI?
CRPence <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.as400.c |
|---|---|
| Organization | midrange.com |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 21-Jul-2014 09:28 -0500, John R. Smith, Jr. wrote: > Based on the comment "there are problems for which MI is a better fit > than RPG", can you give me some specifics? One example: Creating a somewhat efficient OPM program [with almost no automatic or static storage] to execute one or a few particular MI instruction(s); created instead as an OPM RPG, then there would be a significant amount of unnecessary code that was generated as part of the RPG compiler to perform under the RPG run-time environment. I have a couple times, found that availability helpful when I want to extend the capability of a CLP or an SQL request; e.g. the CVTCH instruction, with the capability to convert a string of even-numbered human-readable hexadecimal digits into the equivalent character string of half that length, something which neither the CL nor SQL provide an equivalent capability. Other examples typically involve implementing some activity, that although already provided by some APIs, the API interfaces are at least somewhat inefficient for the desired purpose. For example one could probably create and utilize a space or utilize independent index support more efficiently than the respective User Space or User Index support provided via API. -- Regards, Chuck -- This is the Bare Metal Programming IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries) (C400-L) mailing list To post a message email: C400-L-Zwy7GipZuJhWk0Htik3J/[email protected] To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options, visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/c400-l or email: C400-L-request-Zwy7GipZuJhWk0Htik3J/[email protected] Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/c400-l.