I've heard this recommendation a couple times in these threads. It seems to go against one of the principle "benefits" of ILE - that one can combine modules in different languages.

One question is, how much benefit IS that? I find at least one situation to be beneficial, as described here -

We often have a front-end CL that sets up the environment, then calls an RPG program to do the work.

I think it's a good idea to change the call to a CALLPRC, make the RPG into a module, same with the CL, and link the 2 together - one program object instead of two, for what it's worth.

Now that adds its own complexity to things, in my experience. Here is where a change management app is helpful.

To add to the idea, the RPG module can have multiple procedures, and the CL can call them as needed - instead of calling several separate programs, again reducing the number of program objects.

Just an idea - that a CL driver program can make calls into a linked module instead of separate programs.


On 2/7/2013 9:36 AM, Mark S Waterbury wrote:

Maintenance will be easier if you avoid binding *MODULEs into more than
one place (one *PGM or one *SRVPGM only).


This thread ...


Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page