RE: Standards (was Re: "Constant" performance question)

Well said by both Charles and Buck. Maybe I can get the focus to switch to the bigger picture.

-----Original Message-----
From: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Buck
Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2010 11:26 AM
To: rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Standards (was Re: "Constant" performance question)

On 2/18/2010 11:30 AM, Charles Wilt wrote:

IMHO, having the standards specify a single subfile method is wrong.

Instead, you should have a standard structure for each method and
guidelines of when and how to use each.

I strongly agree with this. Having sat on more than one standards committee, I can say that we have a strong tendency toward overbearing and not enough focus on the point of standards: to make the programmer more efficient.

In this instance, we might spend weeks debating the proper form - load-all vs page at a time - and not spend a single minute discussing an automated subfile loading template.

Standards are very good indeed, as long as the end result is more efficient and accurate programmers.
--buck
--
This is the RPG programming on the IBM i / System i (RPG400-L) mailing list To post a message email: RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l
or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.



Privileged and Confidential. This e-mail, and any attachments there to, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain privileged or confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify me immediately by a return e-mail and delete this e-mail. You are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail and/or any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited.