|
Rob: <snip> Ok, now some people will start foaming at the mouth, but here goes. In my library I use QPGMSRC. I don't use QRPGLESRC, QRPGSRC, QCLSRC. And I'd rather use QFILESRC than a combo of QDDSSRC and QSQLSRC. Why? Because I've created a program from scratch in one language or another only to find a matching one in a different language get clobbered when I compiled it. </snip> Instead of foaming at the mouth, I am in complete agreement with the concept. I think IBM missed the boat when naming source files. As you indicated (or probably, like me, found out the hard way), source is used to create objects of a particular type. So, if you are creating a *PGM object, perhaps the source file should have been called QPGMSRC, files QFILSRC (one can argue specific spellings, but you get the idea). At a previous employer I instituted using QMODSRC as a repository for creating modules (we always created modules, then used CRTPGM to create the program). We left QDDSSRC alone (I know...I'm contradicting myself) but ALL *FILE source was already there. At my current employer I inherited separate source files for each file type (QDDSSRC for PF/LF, QDSPSRC for DSPF, QPRTFSRC for PRTF). As I work on the next incarnation of our application I will change that. I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees the logic of this approach. --Bruce Guetzkow
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.