Re: ILE philosophy

Mark,

>1)  All compiler options s/b able to be put into a source.  While the H
>spec allows most, it does not allow all.

So why not just code a utility to do it?  It's not a big deal -- I did it years
ago, long before you could put compile parameters in H specs.

What I did was by no means a real MAKE utility, but it was trivial to write and
takes care of the vast majority of all the stuff you typically run into in
recreating objects.

All I do is use comments embedded in the source member with special prefixes,
and invoke a user-defined PDM command instead of 14 / 15 to create objects.  My
command looks at the member type to determine the syntax style for comments, so
that I can support RPG, DDS, CL, UIM or whatever (ILE or not).

One prefix just denotes CRTxxx command parameters and overrides.  The majority
of my source members only need this one style of comment, and the utility
decides what CRTxxx command to use based on the source type.  It then adds
whatever keywords and values are identified.  This allowed me to embed keywords
back on CISC releases which do not support the H spec values.  And it works on
display or print files, physical or logical files, CL programs, commands, etc.

Other prefixes allow you to embed commands to run either before or after the
compile (or both), and whether or not to ignore errors vs consider the
termination abnormal.

A typical use here might be to issue an OVRxxx command prior to the CRTxxx
command, and a DLTOVR after it.   It is pretty easy to add comments which
prepare the environment for the compile, when necessary.

Or to add some CRTPGM / UPDPGM statements following a module creation.

Or any number of other things.  It is not near as intelligent as a real MAKE,
but on a RISC machine (even a small one), the commands usually run so fast it is
not a big deal.  I just ensure the object(s) can be correctly (re)created by
simply using the user-defined PDM option.  I never use option 14 or 15.

Then I can use FNDSTRPDM to, for example, recompile every program which
references a given PF or LF.  Or any program which has a /copy for the
prototypes for a given service program.  Or whatever.

A real poor-man's tool for sure, but very effective anyway.  I never run
compiles interactively since I don't have to issue overrides first.  I never
forget to name some keyword while recreating anything, be it a program or a
command or a print file or whatever.  And it works on CISC boxes.

It was also no big deal to write.  Why do people complain about something for
years rather than just write some simple code to deal with it?

>2)  Both binding by copy and reference require a 2 step process, if you've
>changed the module.

Not a problem for me.  (See above)

>3)  In cases where there's a circular reference, ...

Not a problem for me.  (See above)

>4)  ... there s/b some hierarchical display to show that relationship.

Perhaps.  But I've never had a real need for it.

Doug