Re: Service Programs / Binding Directories / *DUPPROC

"RPG400-L" <rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on 02/05/2018 11:56:20
AM:

Having worked so long, using particular standards at a couple of sites,

I

find myself going back to re-address some of the ways things were set up

so

many years ago...

When recreating Service Programs which reference binding directories in
which the Service Program already exists...

You get the error: "Definition supplied multiple times for..." because

the

same subprocedures exist in the module for the service program you are
recreating and in the Service Program itself referenced in the binding
directory.

It seemed to me that there were two ways to solve this problem:

1. Take the Service Program out of the binding directory while you
re-create it, then put it back.
2. Specify Option(*DupProc) on the Create Command.

I always chose the latter of these, but neither seems ideal.

Am I missing something obvious? Has anyone got a better solution?

We fought that battle quite a bit ourselves. I decided that this
problem was mostly caused by specifying the service program both in the
module header as well as in the actual compile command. I found that
99.9% of the time I could avoid this error by only specifying the binding
directories (ours plus 3rd-party vendor's) in the module header (or
ctl-opt) and NOT specifying it or any other binding directories or modules
(other than the "main" one) in the actual compile command. We put all
other modules in the binding directory as reference points.

Otherwise, the other time that this error would rear its ugly head
is when I was trying to change the interface parameters for a particular
service procedure. In this case I would have to delete the service
program object from my library or one of the promotion level libraries in
my library list -- usually NOT the production level library.

I have *never* specified *DUPPROC as I don't want to let the
binder decide where I want a particular procedure reference bound. If
somebody accidentally uses the same procedure name in another service
program I want to know about it right away. Yes, we have standards that
specify service procedure names are supposed to be prefixed by the first 6
or 7 characters of the module name (plus and underscore) to prevent this
sort of thing. But...


Sincerely,

Dave Clark