Re: *SRVPGM vs. dynamically CALLed *PGM from ILE COBOL...

["Steve Richter" <stephenrichter@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 5/9/07, Jon Paris <Jon.Paris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I agree that COBOL has some restrictions on naming etc but this
>
>  >>  no support for passing parms to sub routines within a Cobol program.
>
> Isn't one of them.  There isn't any such support for RPG either - we use
> subprocedures.  The equivalent in COBOL is nested programs, and they take
> parameters just as RPG subprocedures do.

my cobol lifeline at the shop I was in gave nested programs a thumbs
down, but she did not give a reason.  It did seem to be a big
production in terms of all the sections you need in a cobol program.
worth a try though.

> Although COBOL limits the exporting of names (for reasons I don't
> understand) it is actually more powerful in terms of public/global data etc.
> than RPG.  Within the context of one program - nested programs can
> incorporate other nested programs (i.e. procedures having local procedures)
> and can either share data with them or not at their discretion.

the overlaying of data structures seen in the typical COBOL program is
brutal for a programmer to deal with.

The limitiation that I will stand by and that Michael should be aware
of is you effectively cant call into a SRVPGM from COBOL.  Basically,
COBOL does not work with ILE.  ( COBOL only sees one max 10 char
procedure in the SRVPGM )  The COBOL code I worked with had been
"modernized" from mainframe COBOL to call external programs and use
embedded SQL.

-Steve