Re: Need some ammunition (Procedures vs. Sub-routines)

[Info - Shireyllc <info@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree with the last comment.  The number one culprit when adding functionality adversely affects a system is data coupling, where changing something in your app changes a field that is also used somewhere else.  By using local variables, and only local variables, a procedure can better insulate you from that.  And that makes your change safer than using a subroutine with it's global variables.  


David Shirey, Shirey Consulting Services
ERP, EDI, Technical Consulting
dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
616 304 2466 
www.shireyllc.com 




On Dec 27, 2013, at 12:03 PM, BRoche@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> A sub procedure should be less of a worry. It can have internal variables 
> that don't change any data in the rest of the program. Pass in what you 
> need and get returned what you asked for. Without affecting he rest of the 
> code. Depending on your OS level even files can be internal to the 
> procedure. 
>
>
>
>
> From:
> Gary Thompson <gthompson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To:
> "RPG programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries)" 
> <rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, 
> Date:
> 12/27/2013 10:59 AM
> Subject:
> RE: Need some ammunition (Procedures vs. Sub-routines)
> Sent by:
> rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> Sounds like "sub-procedure" has been interpreted as 
> "I plan to inject our system with this virus I found"
> so try switching the focus to "re-usable code" that 
> once thoroughly tested returns your investment because
> it is a "known and understood function".
>
> Yea, I bet you've already beat that drum . . . 
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
> On Behalf Of RPGLIST
> Sent: Friday, December 27, 2013 9:00 AM
> To: rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Need some ammunition (Procedures vs. Sub-routines)
>
> I won't go into the entire lengthy and boring conversation I just had with 
> upper management, but I was basically told that under no circumstances am
> I to add procedures to certain applications.   The justification is that
> by doing so, we will be required to re-test the entire system, payroll, 
> dispatch, load balancing, AP, AR, etc.
>
> I however was provided an opportunity to make my case, and I have a list 
> of reasons, but I need every bit of ammunition I can come up, so any help 
> from ya'll would be cool.
>
> Dutch
>
>
> --
> This is the RPG programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and 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.
>
> -- 
> This is the RPG programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and 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.
>
>
>
> -- 
> This is the RPG programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and 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.