FWIW - Wanted to add a comment on the CL to CLLE thing.
I do a lot of work with PASE and cannot count the number of hours that I
have burned trying to troubleshoot an issue with a program that was
originally compiled as CLLE and then simply recompiled back to OPM CL and
it worked fine.
Now to be fair I do a lot of calling to Qshell and Pase code within my
CL's, but personally I have gone back to wrapping anything that calls PASE
or Java via Qshell as a regular CLP.
Along the line of service programs, as Vern mentioned re-usability of
common code is the best reason for a service program.
I wouldn't expect anyone to re-engineer an old system just to add service
programs to their code, but if you have any app modernization on your
career roadmap, it's better to start using new technologies. Employers
look for those things on a resume and expect you to know the new stuff.
RJS Software Systems Inc.
Where Information Meets Innovation
Document Management, Workflow, Report Delivery, Forms and Business
Web Site: http://www.rjssoftware.com
Tel: (952) 736-5800
Fax: (952) 736-5801
Toll Free: (888) RJSSOFT
Another one? Just compiling CL programs as ILE gives you a great
performance boost with almost no effort - great ROI. Why NOT take the
Others will have more to add.
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,
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2013 by MIDRANGE dot 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 here. If you have questions about this, please contact