RE: /Copy books - yes or no?

My friend is a consultant and doesn't have access to RDi at his current client, so he's still stuck with PDM/SEU. He did have access to it a few years ago, but claimed it was "too slow" and he could get everything done faster with PDM/SEU. So even if he had access, I still don't think he would use it.

So yes, his primary argument was that he wants to see the code in the source that he's working with and not have to go hunt it down. That was really his only argument.

I agree with pretty much what everyone is saying here - use them extensively for control specs and procedure prototypes, not for executable code.

Thanks

Bob Cagle
IT Manager
Lynk, Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: RPG400-L [mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Paul Raulerson
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2015 10:40 PM
To: RPG programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries)
Subject: Re: /Copy books - yes or no?

Good Lord, YES. I don’t know anyone who opposes them actually.

What are the reasons your friend has for not wanting to use copybooks?

-Paul

On Mar 11, 2015, at 5:37 PM, Bob Cagle <bcagle@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Here's a fun topic:

During lunch with my friend today I brought up the subject of copy books, and I was surprised by his complete and total vehemence against them. His son was there also, who is currently learning C++, and he was surprised as well, since C++ makes frequent use of #Include statements.

Personally, I have been using /Include in my RPG instead of /Copy, just because it looks more modern to me.

So, do you use copy books in your RPG? Why, why not? Pros and Cons?

I'll start:

Pro: Procedure prototypes don't have to be rekeyed everywhere

Con: Sometimes you need to see the code in the copy book, and you have to go to a separate source to view it.

Thanks

Bob Cagle
IT Manager
Lynk, Inc.