Swifty wrote:
> On Sun, 04 Mar 2012 04:11:30 -0500, LesK <5mre20@tampabay.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Doesn't START start a new thread? If you want to replicate what the discussion
>> was about, wouldn't you have to do something like:
>>
>> main.rex
>> call inita
>> call initb
>> exit
>
> As I read the thread there was no mention of the use of "call". And no
> one had distinguished between a "call" (which would stay within the
> existing rexx process) and something that starts a new process.
>
> We had also discussed the "first load of the required program" without
> mentioning the scope of "first".
>
> Since these sorts of actions run right to the heart of all the code
> that I've written in the past few years, I wanted to clarify when the
> statements about "first loaded" would be true, and when they were not
> true.
>
> For a horrific few minutes, I was wondering if the required program
> was loaded into memory shared across separate REXX processes, and the
> initialisation code ran only once.
>
> I don't mind separate processes sharing the same loaded code, but
> having the initialisation run only in the first process which required
> it would drive a coach and horses through most of my code.
>
Do I recall you're using Object Rexx, not ooRexx? If so, the 'one
initialization' improvement in ooRexx 4.0 wouldn't apply anyway. We're not
talking about reentrant assembler code :-)

--

Les (Change Arabic to Roman to email me)