RE: Procedure names vs. production support

Bob,

Actually, probably more the opposite direction.  There is a pronounced lack of 
standards here and reluctance to implement any new ones.  I'm trying to get 
ahead of this one before every developer has placed their version of how it 
should be done into production.

Back to the one procedure, one module issue.  I don't mean to beat a dead horse 
here, but I'm trying to come up with new/better arguments for combining 
multiple procedures into a single module.  I haven't made much progress to date.

The issue revolves around testing.  With multiple procedures in a source member 
I would be required to test each one even though only one has changed.  This 
could add significant time to the testing process.  That's why I started 
advocating the one procedure, one module model.  Am I making a mountain out of 
a mole hill?  I've tried convincing my manager that it's not necessary to test 
things that haven't changed but it's pretty much a non starter at the moment.

Rick

-----Original Message-----
From: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Bob Cozzi
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005 4:20 PM
To: 'RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries'
Subject: RE: Procedure names vs. production support


Rick,
Well, option 2 is not something that will make you end up in Purgatory
but... :)
Like Crocodile Dundee says "You can live on it, but it tastes like $h#%.
In other words, it will do the job, but why bother when there are so many
better alternatives.
Back in the days of the System/32, software development houses used names
like BB0050 to identify programs. The sequence number was used as sort of a
program flow sequencing identifier. BB0050 would call BB0060 which would
call BB0080, etc.
Today that kind of naming (for sequencing or not) is very out-dated and
rarely used except in the largest of shops that have total control over
everything from the program name, down to the names used for work fields.
If that's your situation (or something near to it) I would consider showing
them what Microsoft does with some of its class libraries and how the C
runtime library is grouped. While you do see an occasional one proce to one
module association going on, it is the exception and not the rule.
-Bob


Privileged and Confidential.  This e-mail, and any attachments there to, is 
intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally 
privileged or confidential information.  If you have received this e-mail in 
error, please notify me immediately by a return e-mail and delete this e-mail.  
You are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this 
e-mail and/or any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited.