Re: replacing binding by copy with binding by reference

[Jon Paris <jon.paris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Don't forget that (unless it changed in V7) a UPDPGM will not cause the embedded "what used" information to be updated. So if the in-house tool depends on that data to determine what needs to be recompiled then UPDPGM is not a good idea.

 
On 2012-06-27, at 5:43 PM, midrange-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> > I think it should be easy to at least change the tool to do UPDPGM if
> > the pgm exists already instead of crtpgm. I'll try and test that. Are
> > you sure that would work in all circumstances?
> I know of no scenarios where this would not work.
> > As for changing to srvpgm, that's what I was worried about : all those
> > files that stay open, global and static variables,... It looks like
> > we'd have to go through every job to make sure that the difference in
> > behaviour of the new programs does not have any effect. Should we
> > start by eliminating the use of the dftactgrp while still using
> > binding by copy?
> Sounds reasonable to me.

Jon Paris

www.partner400.com
www.SystemiDeveloper.com