Re: Service programs and QSRVSRC

Scott,

What I'm saying is that unless there is a really good reason to roll your own *and* a solid way to ensure that the signature gets changed when the exports change, let the system generate the unique value for you.

I don't think that many people like the way that service program signatures have been implemented, but specifying your own removes what little protection it does give. It's way too easy to overlook changing the signature when a service program is regenerated.

-mark


At 10/13/09 12:39 AM, you wrote:

M. Lazarus wrote:
> Isn't managing your own signature (almost) the equivalent of doing
> LVLCHK(*NO)?

Kind of, yes. Except that there isn't anything similar to using
LVLCHK(*YES).


> If you change the export sequence or add/delete one in
> the middle, there's no protection from using an version, if you
> forget to manually change the signature!

Okay...? Are you saying that hard-coding the signature *without* a
version solves this problem? If so, how?!?!

Or... are you saying that you know of an alternative that would catch
the problem for you if you add/delete one in the middle? If so, please
expand on that.

To read more about my position on the subject, please see the following
article (this is the same article Matt Lavinder posted the link to
earlier in this thread)
http://systeminetwork.com/article/binder-language-and-signature-debate