RE: Procedure names vs. production support -- RPG400-L

Rick,
Well, option 2 is not something that will make you end up in Purgatory
but... :)
Like Crocodile Dundee says "You can live on it, but it tastes like $h#%.
In other words, it will do the job, but why bother when there are so many
better alternatives.
Back in the days of the System/32, software development houses used names
like BB0050 to identify programs. The sequence number was used as sort of a
program flow sequencing identifier. BB0050 would call BB0060 which would
call BB0080, etc. 
Today that kind of naming (for sequencing or not) is very out-dated and
rarely used except in the largest of shops that have total control over
everything from the program name, down to the names used for work fields. 
If that's your situation (or something near to it) I would consider showing
them what Microsoft does with some of its class libraries and how the C
runtime library is grouped. While you do see an occasional one proce to one
module association going on, it is the exception and not the rule.
-Bob


-----Original Message-----
From: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Rick.Chevalier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005 4:07 PM
To: rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Procedure names vs. production support


Bob,

Option 2 was to name the procedure the same as the source member.  In our
case, today, that would result in a source member name like SP4531M  and a
call statement like SP4531M(PARM1 :PARM2).

<snip>
If it was the 1 proc per source member/module rule--then all I can say is if
people think that's a good idea, then they are not up to the skill level to
be using procedures anyway.
Now, this does not preclude you from occasionally having a procedure that is
the lone ranger within a module, it just means that having a rule that
requires that kind of thing is only due to lack of experience with this
stuff.
</snip>
Could you expand on this?  In an earlier post I gave the reason I think we
should have a one to one relationship in this shop. 

Rick

-----Original Message-----
From: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Bob Cozzi
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005 3:56 PM
To: 'RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries'
Subject: RE: Procedure names vs. production support


Rick,
What was option 2 again? I deleted the email.
If it was the 1 proc per source member/module rule--then all I can say is if
people think that's a good idea, then they are not up to the skill level to
be using procedures anyway.
Now, this does not preclude you from occasionally having a procedure that is
the lone ranger within a module, it just means that having a rule that
requires that kind of thing is only due to lack of experience with this
stuff.

All this procedure talk reminds me of when color displays came out on the
System/38. Nobody had experience enough programming color so we had all
kinds of colorful displays created, lots of rules and controls put in place.
As we as a community gain experience with procedures and service programs,
the things that are obvious to others who have already been through it will
become apparent to most people.

On the other hand, if option 2 wasn't the one-proc to one-module thing,
forget everything I just said. :)
-Bob


Privileged and Confidential.  This e-mail, and any attachments there to, is
intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain
legally privileged or confidential information.  If you have received this
e-mail in error, please notify me immediately by a return e-mail and delete
this e-mail.  You are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution
or copying of this e-mail and/or any attachments thereto, is strictly
prohibited.

-- 
This is the RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries (RPG400-L) mailing list
To post a message email: RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l
or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.