Re: [Bulk] Re: Service Program or Stand Alone

[Jeff Young <jyoung0950@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Mark,
Thank you for the advice.
In the case that I am considering (not likely to be approved, but just
getting some idea), we have a system that has hundreds of programs calling
"black box programs" to do specific a specific function.  That function
might be complex like computing a price for an item being sold, to
something simple like converting a date.  The date conversion routine is
not just a simple convert from a known format to ISO or back, but
converting from a job format to another and back.
Now that I am creating custom applications for customers using our package,
rather than creating prototypes to call these programs, I am thinking of
trying to convert them to service programs.
Since there is a very large number of programs using the old version, I was
thinking of using the "stub" method to get around this.



Jeff Young
Sr. Programmer Analyst


On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 4:13 AM, Mark S Waterbury <
mark.s.waterbury@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi, Jeff:
>
> I would like to add the following thoughts ...
>
> 1. before creating any new "stub" *PGM that calls the corresponding new
>    *SRVPGM procedure, run a FNDSTRPDM to determine how many places
>    actually CALL the original *PGM
> 2. if that number is not "too large," I would just go ahead and change
>    the CALLs to just invoke the new procedure directly, and thus
>    dispense with having to create one more "stub" *PGM that needs to be
>    maintained (and eventually eliminated)
> 3. how many is "too many" may vary, depending on project workload and
>    how much time you have available for such "maintenance" work
> 4. I would only want to create a "stub" *PGM to call the procedure in
>    the *SRVPGM for cases where that original program is called in a
>    large number of programs -- too many to conveniently change them all
>    "in one go" ...
> 5. and then, in these cases, I would subsequently start working towards
>    reducing the number of programs that call this "stub" program,
>    replacing with the new procedure call, gradually, as time permits.
>    The long-term goal should be to eventually eliminate all such "stub"
>    programs
>
> I hope this "makes sense" ...
>
> Mark S. Waterbury
>
> > On 7/21/2014 12:17 PM, Jeff Young wrote:
>
> > To everyone that responded, thanks.
> > As I indicated, this is something I am researching for my own benefit.
> > I had originally thought along the lines of changing the "OLDPGM" to
> > "NEWSRVPGM" and creating a new "OLDPGM"  with the original parms and logic
> > to call procedures in the service program.
> >
> > It is nice to know that most of the community appears to confirm that *if*
> > something like this is done (change OLDPGM to NEWSRVPGM) that the above
> > would be the best method to use.
> >
> > I will not be changing anything for the sake of change, but if I do need
> > to
> > add significant new code and/or function, I will keep this in mind.
> >
> >
> > Jeff Young
> > Sr. Programmer Analyst
> >
> >  --
> 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.