Announcement

Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.

QCMDEXC calls and functions for

Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • QCMDEXC calls and functions for

    I have a diverse MAPICS, Mac-Pac, PRMS background and very little home grown experience. In my current position, I am working with what I would term as spaghetti code, as well as non-structured, unreadable, and difficult to maintain. My 'report card' by my own standards for mods or new development I ever do, is that it is first and foremost, functional, reliable, readable, and maintainable. That it is not bit nor byte efficient is not a concern, however, that it is process efficient is. What I am running into now, is code that is sbmitted to run, check every 3 minutes for a file to have one record updated to see when a prerequisite process has completed, then when ready, use QCMDEXC to perform clears, overrides (and help me - including LIBRARIES). This to me seems 'hard' on the resource for diving into a HLL program only to use QCMDEXC to come out and do something that should have/could have been done up front in the CL. I think a trigger off of the input 'tag' file would alleviate the resource usage of having a program sit and wait for data to process. I may have other questions but can anyone tell me where I can find info to clarify my position or satisfy my curiousity that it is not 'backwards' to do it this way. The library issue has to go either way - using JOBDs. Otherwise testing is all but impossible on a maching with Test and Prod on the same box. Any ideas/comments welcomed. Thanks.
    Code

  • #2
    QCMDEXC calls and functions for

    I agree with you; this should be done in the CL. But if you can't do that, I think you should re-write the program in RPG IV and incorporate it to clean up the code so that is in much more readable and functional. There's some nice tricks using a protottype to QCMDEXC with a variable length command variable, and the concatenation is cleaner using the expanded Factor 2 and the "Eval" op-code. But what from the code you included, CL would be a more practicle way to go.

    Comment

    Working...
    X