Re: RPG Service Program vs Include Source for Shared Subprocedures and SQL Calls

Good point on the /IF /DEFINE

I have always used binding source to make sure that the signatures stay in the correct order as well.

I think then when you add new procedures to the bottom everything stays in-sync for existing programs to use the existing procedures.

Is that right ?

Regards,
Richard Schoen
Web: http://www.richardschoen.net
Email: richard-DiTrGpQEJGItADg8e/3/[email protected]

------------------------------

message: 3
date: Sat, 21 Mar 2026 10:21:09 +0000
from: Brian Parkins <[email protected]>
subject: Re: RPG Service Program vs Include Source for Shared
Subprocedures and SQL Calls

Even under these circumstances a *SRVPGM <may> provide a solution.

Multiple versions of the same procedure can co-exist in a single
*SRVPGM, (provided the names are unique). The flexibility of Signatures
and the Export Symbol Table.

100% agree that *SRVPGMs are the better option; /COPY and /INCLUDE
should - in the main - be used only for Prototype inclusion, (with /IF,
/DEFINE, etc. as required).

Brian.

On 21/03/2026 05:22, Niels Liisberg wrote:
The is some exceptions: versioning - where different clients need different
versions at a certain point in time.



-- 
This is the RPG programming on IBM i (RPG400-L) mailing list
To post a message email: [email protected]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l
or email: RPG400-L-request-+hD5IHI5Xscn3HwCXmMcX9BPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at https://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.

Please contact support-FMtJrHiV//lnDLsaKlm4mFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org for any subscription related questions.