|
Each time I add a new procedure to the service program, the copy book changes and as such I have to recompile all of my programs that use this.
Huh? Why would adding a new prototype to a copy book require you to recompile all the programs?
If the programs don't use that prototype, what does it accomplish to recompile them?
If they do use the prototype, you have to re-compile them anyway, since you have to add code to call the procedure.
So for this setup I feel the best way to go might be to not use copybooks. Am I missing anything here.
If you don't use a copybook, then you have to re-write the prototype in every program. That suddenly makes the routines much more difficult to re-use.
In addition to that, it increases the changes of introducing a bug. Prototypes are there to protect you from passing invalid parameters to a procedure. The way they do that is by establishing a set of rules for how the parameters need to be passed, matching that against the PI to make sure they're the same. As long as you reuse the same prototype, you're protected against errors.
If you re-write the prototype every time, there's no longer any guarantee that it'll match the PI, and therefore each tiem you write it, you risk making a mistake and discarding the protection prototypes offer.
I simply can't imagine that Turnover or MKS or any of the major change management systems would prevent you from using prototypes properly.
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.
midrange.com
