RE: CRTSRVPGM

That's pretty much been my approach all the time. One signature & add new
exports to the end of the list. Prevents the signature violation &
recompiles. Works good enough for me. As far as the revision history the
source line dates & the internal documentation gives me all I need to know
when things were added and what they were.

Thanks,
Tommy Holden



From: Bryce Martin <BMartin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 01/13/2011 07:38 AM
Subject: RE: CRTSRVPGM
Sent by: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx



Yes, these lists can be very long. I thought it seemed intuitive at first

as well. But after having about half a dozen listings in one of my
service programs I decided to just go to the simple route. Static
signature, 1 list, and just throw any new exports at the end of the list.
Then I never have to recompile anything except programs that need any new
procedures.... which, if I add a call to a new procedure, will need to be
recompiled anyway. There is nothing to even think about at that point.


Thanks
Bryce Martin
Programmer/Analyst I
570-546-4777



David FOXWELL <David.FOXWELL@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
01/13/2011 04:00 AM
Please respond to
Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>


To
Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
cc

Subject
RE: CRTSRVPGM

-----Message d'origine-----
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] De la part de Charles Wilt
Envoyé : mercredi 12 janvier 2011 19:26

I feel that it's a little scary though. Imagine someone

made a mistake

in the binder source? I suppose it's difficult to make, but

it must be possible.

Sure, but if somebody can't be trusted to add lines to the
end...perhaps they are in the wrong line of work?

And it's easy enough to double check. Lot's easier than
double checking that you didn't miss recompiling something
that used a bound by copy module.

Maybe it's because I'm so used to prototypes that would make sure I didn't

mix up my parameters when I compile. Here we have the possibility of
mixing up procedures, with one program running ok and another not. And no
compiler to help.
In the end I suppose it's similar to adding a parameter to an old opm
program.

I agree with Barbara's conclusions from the message you linked to:
1. Don't use EXPORT(*ALL).
2. You can't change the order of the exports with either
style of binder
source, so you might as well use the simple form with the single
list of exports.

As a newbie to binder source, I found Buck's way with multiple lists and
signatures very intuitive. But I can imagine that these lists can become
very long.