RE: DFTACTGRP(*NO) ACTGRP(*NEW)

[Buck Calabro <Buck.Calabro@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Joe said:

>Mixed-mode is bad.  There's no other way to say it.

Meaning Mixed RPG III syntax and RPG IV syntax.  Not meaning ILE, as in
activation groups and service programs.  I am using ILE to mean activation
groups, service programs and override scoping.  Not to mean RPG IV syntax.

>Or how about this: don't bother with service 
>programs until you've taken the prerequisite 
>step of converting to RPG IV.  

OK.  People will probably convert individual source members to RPG IV syntax
one at a time, as they do maintenance on them.  But even if they decide to
go all at once: every member to RPG IV syntax, the programs will continue to
run in the DAG by default.  And there's no reason for that to change because
it's really an OPM application, scoping all overrides to the *JOB.  There
isn't any benefit to run them in a separate activation group because the
code _design_ doesn't expect to run in a separate AG.  They were designed
(back in the 90's) to run in a single AG (it's now called the default AG.)

The hitch in the gitalong comes when I decide to use my first subprocedure.
I'm forced to choose an activation group then, because the compiler insists
on running outside the DAG.  I can cheat and use *CALLER, but that puts me
back in the DAG, where the compiler didn't want me.  There must be a good
reason for that...

The "ILE running in the DAG" problem gets worse when I decide to collect my
first dozen subprocedures into my first service program.  I'm fairly certain
that running service programs in the DAG is a Bad Thing, so *CALLER is not a
good fit.  But as I mentioned to Scott, perhaps this is outdated thinking.
If we don't use shared memory and don't need override scoping, perhaps we
can live with the occasional service program hiccough because we really,
truly don't need anything but the DAG (meaning all ILE becomes *CALLER)?

What do we advise people in this situation?  No ILE until they re-design the
entire application to use ILE?  And then convert over one full application
at a time (i.e. all the payroll programs, all the G/L programs...)?

  --buck