|
--- Buck <buck.calabro@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > For a very first step, I would omit the *MODULE and put the entire procedure > in one /COPY member while putting the PR in another /COPY member (I use > QPROTOSRC for that. Thanks to David Morris for the suggestion!) So, I'd > have 3 source members: <snip> Thanks for laying that out, Buck! For the little I know about procedures, this would seem to be a good way to get the feet wet, but nothing more. I have not yet seen any responses (if there are any) to my post yesterday, but wouldn't one want to move quickly to service programs as opposed to coding inline sub-procs? I have a thing or two against using /COPY. No version control. Library / File names get changed, will all the programs that use /COPYs get modified to reflect this? (Or will some poor sap discover years down the road that /COPY LIB/FILE(MEMBER) is no longer, and good luck finding it.) Given the choice of using /COPY or including the procedure source in the main program's source member, I'd always take the latter. But given the choice between that and service programs, I think I'd always (usually?) take service programs. My thing against /COPY is just opinion only, based on my experience. No holy war please. GA __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com
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.