Ray,

My understanding of this may be a bity skewed from my HP1000 days, but here goes....

If you make the code called directly from the main program an RL and include it at link time, that's faster than referencing it from an XL, and definitely faster than refrencing an RL at load (run) time.  Of course, every time you have to change that module, you'll have to re-link the program.  Some people go as far as $INCLUDEing the source into each program that calls it, which I don't like, then if you change that code, you have to be sure to re-compile all calling programs, and re-link.

Personally, I'll use an RL for routines common to only a distinct set of programs (ie., one to a few main programs), build it in at link time, and manage all the related mains and RLs as a package.

-Dave







[log in to unmask] on 10/22/2001 03:17:00 PM
To:     [log in to unmask]@Internet
cc:      (bcc: David T Darnell/CO/KAIPERM)
Subject:        [HP3000-L] XLand RL

Hi all,

I have a question on RL vs. XL.

Given an outer block A that calls subprog E as well as 3 sub-progs B, C, and
D, and subprogs B, C and D also call subprog  E, is there really any
measurable speed benefit to making E an RL vs. leaving it an XL?  It seems
that once the module, E,  from the XL is mapped into memory, it should be as
quick as the RL that was compiled into A, B,  C and D...even though the
manual states otherwise?

Anyone?

Thanks in advance.

Ray Shahan

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *