Ynt: rpg400-l-digest V1 #239

-----Özgün Ýleti-----
Kimden: James W. Kilgore <qappdsn@ibm.net>
Kime: RPG400-L@midrange.com <RPG400-L@midrange.com>
Tarih: 29 Eylül 1999 Çarþamba 16:10
Konu: Re: rpg400-l-digest V1 #239


>Pete,
>
>I agree, "today" noone is writing 150 page programs. One writes 15 10 page
programs to
>do the same thing.
>
>Wait a minute .... I write 15 10 page programs that use service programs
and all of the
>related /COPY interfaces, and if I made them into a single "function"
listing .... I
>get 250 pages! <g>
>
>Even under the OPM model I never wrote a program that listed over 50 pages,
but with a
>gazillion "shop standard" /COPY members it COMPILED into 150 pages of
paper.
>
>We are in agreement: it's the maintenance, not the development that burns
the bucks.
>Well, as long a few bucks are spent on the rare commodity of "forethought".
<g>
>
>My point was maintain.  The UPDAT command with externally defined files,
and -no-
>output specs makes me burn the clock to hunt down exactly what is being
UPDAT'd.  And
>guess what, I have to study every module to make user -they- aren't doing
some closet
>file changes =:-o Talk about "hidden" functions! Who knows?
>
>IMHO, there is no better place in the world than the keeper of "the law of
the land".
>You can make up what ever you want!
>
>I'm all for modular development and code reuse.  Now sell me on why I
should write
>twice as much code then I have in the past in order to reuse it in all the
same places
>that I already have working. +8-)
>
>Now, remember it's already working, be gentle, but why should I spend
another 500k
>changing it?  Shouldn't I spent it on something it doesn't already do?
>
>Regards,
>James W. Kilgore
>qappdsn@ibm.net
>
>P.S. Sort of sounds like the BIF discussion doesn't it?
>
>
>Pete wrote:
>
>> James
>>
>> Obviously no one is creating 150 page programs anymore, and code that
>> updates data fields is concentrated in one place? I have needed O-specs
>> for the last 6 years, I can't see me adopting them now.
>> This begs the question about how to persuade managers that some rewrites
>> really are necessary. I've been lucky enough to have a few opportunities
>> to do some rejuvenation work - in many places this is seen as a perk !:(
>>
>> I only wish that a measurement of the maintenance over-head costs of the
>> old-code had been accurately gathered to be compared with the new. I
>> suspect that managers have sometimes been bitten in the past by a less
>> experienced guy's desire to re-write a large function and in the process
>> to use every new trick in the book, including large-scale static binding
>> and too many procedures. The problem is that it takes several years for
>> a coder to establish a value system and a feel for code elegance, and
>> unfortunately the vast majority of coders (present company excepted) are
>> simply not interested.
>>
>
>+---
>| This is the RPG/400 Mailing List!
>| To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com.
>| To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com.
>| To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
>| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator:
david@midrange.com
>+---

+---
| This is the RPG/400 Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---