RE: Procedure names vs. production support -- RPG400-L

I've seen subroutine naming sequences like that--SR1, SR2,
SR2A...Besides making programs hard to understand, it's very easy to
break the sequencing.  Where I work there are quite a few CL programs
from the 80s whose names begin with "CL" that are still in production.
Makes it real easy to find the one you're looking for.  <g>

I can understand people wanting one procedure per module, but they're
(IMNSHO) totally wrong.  Bob points out DLLs and the C libraries.
Pascal had similar grouping things called "units."  Java packages are
that way too.  I can, in a way, see a reason for testing the entire
service program when a procedure is added.  A correctly written
procedure shouldn't have side effects but you never know.  OTOH, the
same thing could apply to the single module variety.

I'll bet folks have a few horror stories about regular old fashioned RPG
programs that worked fine by themselves and did horrible completely
unforseen things when they interacted with other programs in production.

 
-----Original Message-----
From: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bob Cozzi
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005 2:20 PM
To: 'RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries'
Subject: RE: Procedure names vs. production support

Rick,
Well, option 2 is not something that will make you end up in Purgatory
but... :) Like Crocodile Dundee says "You can live on it, but it tastes
like $h#%.
In other words, it will do the job, but why bother when there are so
many better alternatives.
Back in the days of the System/32, software development houses used
names like BB0050 to identify programs. The sequence number was used as
sort of a program flow sequencing identifier. BB0050 would call BB0060
which would call BB0080, etc.
Today that kind of naming (for sequencing or not) is very out-dated and
rarely used except in the largest of shops that have total control over
everything from the program name, down to the names used for work
fields.
If that's your situation (or something near to it) I would consider
showing them what Microsoft does with some of its class libraries and
how the C runtime library is grouped. While you do see an occasional one
proce to one module association going on, it is the exception and not
the rule.
-Bob



*****************************
NOTICE:
All e-mail sent to or from this e-mail address will be received or otherwise 
recorded by
The Sharper Image corporate e-mail system and is subject to archival, 
monitoring,
and review by and/or disclosure to Sharper Image security and other management.
This message is intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain 
information
that is privileged and confidential.

The contents of this message may contain personal views which are not the views 
of The Sharper Image.
If you are not the intended recipient, dissemination of this communication is 
prohibited.
*****************************