Re: ILE Service Program best practices

[Simon Coulter <shc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 16/11/2004, at 10:01 AM, Mike Eovino wrote:

> I won't call our design either good or bad, but we do put related
> subprocedures together into  service programs.  So (as far as we know)
> all the subprocedures in each service program should be grouped
> together.

I meant: Given that A calls B and B calls A maybe they are related 
functions and should be in a single service program rather than in two.

You could bind the A module and B module together into service program 
X. This would make sense if A and B are related functions.

> > > The only thing we can think of is to limit service programs to a
> > > single subprocedure, but is this really something we want to do?
>
> Just wondering, is there a strong reason NOT to go this route?  I just
> want to know so when people ask, I can tell them why.

I wouldn't do this because I think it's silly. Putting each procedure 
in a separate service program is just as silly as putting them all in a 
single service program.

You'd have more service programs to resolve and activate at program 
start. You'd have more objects to keep track of. You'd run out of 
sensible names for service programs given that they are restricted to 
10 characters.

Keeping each procedure in a separate source member might be a good idea 
because it simplifies making changes in a shop with multiple 
programmers.

Regards,
Simon Coulter.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
   FlyByNight Software         AS/400 Technical Specialists

   http://www.flybynight.com.au/
   Phone: +61 3 9419 0175   Mobile: +61 0411 091 400        /"\
   Fax:   +61 3 9419 0175                                   \ /
                                                             X
                 ASCII Ribbon campaign against HTML E-Mail  / \
--------------------------------------------------------------------