|
I would agree with that. Before a procedure goes into a service program, I will test the bajeebies out of it, make sure there is no way it can bomb. This makes them black boxes, I stick something into this black box, and out comes my result, I don't care what it did in the mean time. With /COPY members I do have to care, what variables is this declaring that may mess with my program's variables? Is it changing any indicators that may mess with me, etc... A procedure in a service program should be 100% transparent to the program calling it, except for the advertised variables it changes (the return parameter and maybe procedure parameters). Regards, Jim Langston Me transmitte sursum, Caledoni! rob@dekko.com wrote: > > And I bet you hate using operation codes like READ, or CHAIN since you > don't have the internal code for these buried in the same program. Instead > you have to read an IBM manual to see how they work. And believe me, > they've changed over the releases. > I feel that a well documented, and tested, subprocedure should be every bit > as trusted/used as a good operation code. > > Rob Berendt > > ================== > A smart person learns from their mistakes, > but a wise person learns from OTHER peoples mistakes. > > > "Bill Bynum" > <bill.bynum@nucorcoldfin To: ><RPG400-L@midrange.com> > ishsc.com> cc: > Sent by: Subject: RE: ILE >Propoganda > owner-rpg400-l@midrange. > com > > > 06/21/2001 12:29 PM > Please respond to > RPG400-L > > > > >I can't tell you the number of times I've heard various junior > >programmers > >say something similar. How about a more realistic scenario? > > In my MANY years of programming,(mind you that MANY constitutes a level > much higher than Jr. programmer) every subroutine written in programs that > are currently being used in a production environment have been previously > tested(i.e. old code that is NOT broken). Granted, you may have to tweak > the > code(i.e. change indicator references, etc.) but it puts the code right in > front of you rather than relying on a hardcopy, and/or an additional > session, swapping back and forth from one to the other. > > Talking about being realistic, when you are dealing with RPGII, RPGIII, > RPG400, and RPGLE in one environment, and you know that there is a > subroutine or a piece of code that is being used in an RPGII program that > would help you in an RPG400 program, you better believe that I will go and > copy that code and drop it into the new program. And the nice thing about > it, it works every time. > > Bill > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rpg400-l@midrange.com [mailto:owner-rpg400-l@midrange.com]On > Behalf Of Buck Calabro > Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 12:15 PM > To: RPG400-L@midrange.com > Subject: RE: ILE Propoganda > > >It seems to me that if it is code that has been > >previously written in another program, the > >simplest and quickest way would be to copy > >and paste that part of the code to the new > >program. Let's face it, for most every project > >you are working on there is a deadline > > I can't tell you the number of times I've heard various junior programmers > say something similar. How about a more realistic scenario? > > "copy and paste that part of the code" versus > > o Locate the code. It's everywhere, so decide which version is closest. > o Copy and insert the code. > o Change the field names to fit the new code into the existing program. > o Check the indicators to be sure there's no overlap. > o Doing I/O? Check that we won't disturb the file pointers. > o Manipulating text? Change the array size/field lengths to match the new > requirements. > o Manipulating numbers? Change the field sizes to match the new > requirements. > o Got work fields? Don't want to miss them. > o Test the new code to see if it works. > o Test the old code to see that it isn't broken. > > Integrating at the "copy the source code" level takes more than simply > copying lines of text. If it truly WERE that simple, wouldn't most of your > code be /COPY statements? > > Buck > +--- > | This is the RPG/400 Mailing List! > | To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com. > | To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com. > | To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. > | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: > david@midrange.com > +--- > > +--- > | This is the RPG/400 Mailing List! > | To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com. > | To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com. > | To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. > | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: > david@midrange.com > +--- > > +--- > | This is the RPG/400 Mailing List! > | To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com. > | To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com. > | To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. > | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com > +--- -- +--- | This is the RPG/400 Mailing List! | To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com. | To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com. | To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com +---
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.