RE: Modules using NOMAIN, but not in a Service Program

-----Message d'origine-----
[mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] De la part de
KSinner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

This is my first post to this list,

I have the feeling that this thread will be one of those lengthy ones with lots of disagreements!

I am running into several cases where a module is bound to 1
or more programs and the module has the NOMAIN keyword, with
only 1 subprocedure, and it is not bound into a service program.

Several cases - does that mean that normally a program uses a service program but sometimes only it is bound by copy? I've learned from similar threads on the list that this kind of binding is advantageous only for security reasons as the procedures of that module are rendered private to the program to which it is bound.

Are there any advantages or disadvantages to this method? (I am
accustomed to using service programs for modules like these,
but want to be open to other methods if there are benefits to do so.)

DISADVANTAGES
I work in a world without service programs. When we modify a module, our home grown cms will detect all the programs to which this module is bound and recompile and rebind them all. There are quite a lot of 1 subprocedure modules that were written early on, but now all related subprocedures will be found in the same module. Come to think of it, I feel that if you only do bind by copy, this is perhaps better as you will only bind the subprocedures your program needs. In our case, this has caused so many programs to become dependent upon each other that the smallest change in a supprocedure will have a cascading effect and many, many programs get rebound even if they don't need the procedure that was changed! It often causes developper gridlock : imagine you change a file in such a module and you need to rebind everything. If you are many developpers there's always one who will start scratching his head when suddenly a program that worked crashes or something.

ADVANTAGE?
I once was so dismayed I asked why am I binding at all? Why not just do dynamic calls as without service programs it isn't really ILE, it's RPGIII with all the advantages of RPGIV code. The answer I got that it was much faster to call the program that was bound. I wonder. If that program is bound to everything and the system has to deal with all programs that are just as fat, doesn't that slow it down?