RE: Function Opinion

["Bartell, Aaron L. (TC)" <ALBartell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree.  

In our shop we do the one module to one service program way with potentially
many sub procs in each module.  Not that we think multiple modules in a
service program is bad, it has just worked out this way for us so far.  It
really comes down to having somebody oversee all development and then make
sure all related modules get bound together in a appropriately named service
program.

How would it work if you were binding many modules in one service program
and you only needed to change one module in a service program?  Would you
use the update service program command, create the entire service program
over?

This is where one module to one service program benefits my shop I think.
We have to distribute our software to our remote companies once a month (at
least) and if we bundled many modules in one service program we might be
sending unchanged code.

Just some thoughts,

Aaron Bartell

-----Original Message-----
From: Pete Clifford (ariadne software)
[mailto:pete@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 11:18 AM
To: RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries
Subject: Re: Function Opinion


Yes, good question.

I can see that one module per service program might have some justification,
but I'd interpreted this as one function=subprocedure per service program,
i.e. a single procedure export, which makes no sense at all to me.

Pete