Re: "Shared" procedure division code
- From: "Oliver Wong" <owong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 21:51:04 GMT
"Caederus" <davidburnham@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1122394642.142312.250340@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> I neither recommend this approach nor (personally) know of any reason to
>> use it
>> in today's computing environment, but did think it was worth mentioning
>> (both
>> for the "use of duplicated code" and the solution to "maintenance of such
>> code")
>
> Maintenance of the code is the big reason to use such code.
>
> If you have a routine that works and is used by a number of different
> programs, putting it in a copybook is the quickest and easiest way to
> stream line the maintenance. However If it starts getting to big there
> is the question of making it it's own sub program.
I think the issue Bill was trying to point out was that the code was
inlined, or COPYed in two (or more) locations. If it were merely an issue of
having correct code, and not wanting to touch that code for fear of breaking
it, the code could have been put in a paragraph, and COPYed onced, and to
simply PERFORM that paragraph.
- Oliver
.
- References:
- "Shared" procedure division code
- From: William M. Klein
- Re: "Shared" procedure division code
- From: Caederus
- "Shared" procedure division code
- Prev by Date: Oracle CASE statement precompile error in Micro Focus
- Next by Date: Re: Oracle CASE statement precompile error in Micro Focus
- Previous by thread: Re: "Shared" procedure division code
- Next by thread: Re: "Shared" procedure division code
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|