|
>> Thanks. What if the OVERRIDE is done >> in the RPG itself? I know,bad idea, >> but it's been like that forever. > > >Why is that a bad idea? I think putting >it in the same RPG where the file opens >is the *best* way to go about it. > >IMHO, a well written program never relies >on other programs to make sure it does it's >job correctly. -snip- >This way, everything's right there >in front of the programmer. He >doesn't need to search to find every CL >that might do different overrides >on a program. I have a slightly different view of this: there is no way that a modern application can be written with one source member. I'm exaggerating for the sake of impact, but conceptually, I _want_ my programmers to think big. I _want_ them to go out and look at the job stream before tinkering. Not that the participants in this thread have done so, but I have heard way too many RPG programmers refuse to use /COPY members, service programs and DDS (esp. printer files) because "I can't see the whole thing at once." Scott is right when he notes (indirectly) that code that operates together should be together, and he's surely right to note that an OVRxxx in a CL program far upstream has an effect on the downstream RPG program, but that's the nature of overrides. It's also the nature of activation groups - they affect more than one program. And that is the nature of modern applications, I think. --buck
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.