Re: Change source file name from QRPGSRC to QRPGLESRC

If you decide to change, I would not for changes sake, consider naming your source file without the Q in the first position. Pick a name by application, or other division that makes sense to you. There is no real reason not to combine any/or all source members into a single file except member naming convention or to keep them logically separated by application or other delineation rather than by source type.

Jim Oberholtzer
CEO/Chief Technical Architect
Agile Technology Architects, LLC


On 5/11/2010 3:07 PM, Jeff Crosby wrote:

*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(r) Pro*
I don't really have a compelling reason.

And it's certainly not because I've run out of things to do.
:)

On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 2:31 PM, David Gibbs<david@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Jeff Crosby wrote:

I store no /COPY source in QRPGSRC, so other than debug issues, do you

see

any pitfalls in renaming QRPGSRC to QRPGLESRC?

Other than existing source references (in objects) being wrong, I can't see
any problems.

Of course, I also can't see any upside to renaming the source PF. If
QRPGSRC works, why bother changing it?

david

--
IBM i on Power Systems - For when you can't afford to be out of business
--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.