Re: ILE Service Program best practices

[Simon Coulter <shc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 16/11/2004, at 2:06 PM, Alan C wrote:

> A separate service program per procedure is too much, but you refer to 
> maybe keeping each procedure in a separate source member.

That's what I said. I wouldn't have a single procedure per service 
program. I'd group related procedures into a collection of service 
programs according to some method that made sense. For example:
	STRING things
	MATH things
	FILE I/O things
	Accounts Receivable things
	Accounts Payable things
	General Ledger things
	CUSTMAST file things (consumes FILE I/O things)
	ITEMMAST file things (consumes FILE I/O things)
	
etc.

I wouldn't separate individual procedures into separate source members 
either but I can see a case for doing so.

> This sounds like at compile time you put them together with /COPY for 
> the compile?

No way! /COPY is a crock. Marginally useful in the "olden days", also 
known as "the before time", but still requires all code that references 
the copy-code to be recompiled when the copy-code changes.

Bind by Reference is better. Build a service program containing the 
common code (this is bind by copy) and bind the service program to the 
consuming programs and service programs (this is bind by reference). 
See the ILE Concepts manual for detailed information.

Done properly, service program code can be updated and enhanced without 
requiring the consumers to be recompiled.

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  / \
--------------------------------------------------------------------