View previous topic :: View next topic
|
Author |
Message |
Arun Raj
Moderator
Joined: 17 Oct 2006 Posts: 2481 Location: @my desk
|
|
|
|
Hii
I have a copybook which is used over several programs.I want to add a new field to the copybook which is not referenced in some of the abovesaid programs.Do i need to recompile all the programs?
Thanks
Archana |
|
Back to top |
|
|
William Thompson
Global Moderator
Joined: 18 Nov 2006 Posts: 3156 Location: Tucson AZ
|
|
|
|
Only if the addition of the filed changes the relitive displacement of other fields that are referenced. Or if the copybook defines a record whose length has changed. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
guptae
Moderator
Joined: 14 Oct 2005 Posts: 1208 Location: Bangalore,India
|
|
|
|
Hi Archana,
If the adding the new field in the copybook at end & the programs are not going to use this then there is no need to recompile those program. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
sihanature Warnings : 1 New User
Joined: 01 Sep 2005 Posts: 33
|
|
|
|
Hi
Yes we need to recompile this copybook when the program is going to have impact due to this.
Regards |
|
Back to top |
|
|
vijay_bn79
New User
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 Posts: 48 Location: Hyderabad
|
|
|
|
Hi..,
If the new field is added to the copy book and if the program not copiled then it will take the old load module only, even though if you add in the middle or at the end it wont consider, if you compile the program then only it will get effective, if you recompiled the program and eventhough if your program is not using that field(record length will be incresed by adding the filed in the layout) then it may fail becouse it will take the new load module,
if you are adding any new field to copy book then it is better to recompile all the programs which are all using this copy book |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Arun Raj
Moderator
Joined: 17 Oct 2006 Posts: 2481 Location: @my desk
|
|
|
|
Hi
Thanks for the clarification.Suppose the new field I want to add is a level-88 data item(condition name).What would be the solution in that case?
Thanks |
|
Back to top |
|
|
vijay_bn79
New User
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 Posts: 48 Location: Hyderabad
|
|
|
|
arcvns wrote: |
Hi
Thanks for the clarification.Suppose the new field I want to add is a level-88 data item(condition name).What would be the solution in that case?
Thanks |
Hi Archana..,
For Condition names also same.., see if you are changing any field of the copy book means in the analysis phase it self you should check which programs are using this copy book and you should recompile all the programs and also you should consider the impacts on all programs by changing field
pls correct me if i miss anything |
|
Back to top |
|
|
William Thompson
Global Moderator
Joined: 18 Nov 2006 Posts: 3156 Location: Tucson AZ
|
|
|
|
If the ** is the only thing you add, to an existing field definition, no recompile is needed. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
vijay_bn79
New User
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 Posts: 48 Location: Hyderabad
|
|
|
|
William Thompson wrote: |
If the ** is the only thing you add, to an existing field definition, no recompile is needed. |
Hi..
Please brief me this, adding ** means |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Arun Raj
Moderator
Joined: 17 Oct 2006 Posts: 2481 Location: @my desk
|
|
|
|
Quote: |
For Condition names also same.., see if you are changing any field of the copy book means in the analysis phase it self you should check which programs are using this copy book and you should recompile all the programs and also you should consider the impacts on all programs by changing field |
Please let me know what would be the error if I am not recompiling those programs in which the newly added condition is not checked for.
Thanks |
|
Back to top |
|
|
William Thompson
Global Moderator
Joined: 18 Nov 2006 Posts: 3156 Location: Tucson AZ
|
|
|
|
Silly me....** is a shifted 88...... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
vijay_bn79
New User
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 Posts: 48 Location: Hyderabad
|
|
|
|
arcvns wrote: |
Quote: |
For Condition names also same.., see if you are changing any field of the copy book means in the analysis phase it self you should check which programs are using this copy book and you should recompile all the programs and also you should consider the impacts on all programs by changing field |
Please let me know what would be the error if I am not recompiling those programs in which the newly added condition is not checked for.
Thanks |
Hi..,
if you are not recompiling means it will take the old load module and run as usuall and that code changes will not considered at all |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Arun Raj
Moderator
Joined: 17 Oct 2006 Posts: 2481 Location: @my desk
|
|
|
|
Quote: |
William Thompson wrote:
If the 88 is the only thing you add, to an existing field definition, no recompile is needed.
|
From this what I understood is that if I am trying to add one more condition name to a field that has already been defined in the copybook ,no recompile is needed.Correct me If I got u wrong |
|
Back to top |
|
|
William Thompson
Global Moderator
Joined: 18 Nov 2006 Posts: 3156 Location: Tucson AZ
|
|
|
|
Vijayakumar,
If Arcvns only adds an 88, all existing programs don't give a hoot if it is there or not, before it was added, none of them were using it and after it was added are you expecting some of the programs to auto-magicly attempt to re-code themselves? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Arun Raj
Moderator
Joined: 17 Oct 2006 Posts: 2481 Location: @my desk
|
|
|
|
Quote: |
I have a copybook which is used over several programs.I want to add a new field to the copybook which is not referenced in some of the abovesaid programs.Do i need to recompile all the programs?
|
I think my question is not clear to you.With the addition of the new conditon name some of the programs which were using the copybook were also changed accordingly. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
William Thompson
Global Moderator
Joined: 18 Nov 2006 Posts: 3156 Location: Tucson AZ
|
|
|
|
Archana,
Cute, quoting yourself....grin.....
OK, you have a copybook that is used in a number of programs, right?
You changed? added? both? a field? condition name? both? to that copybook, right?
You want to know if the programs that have the copybook but do not reference the field? condition name? that you changed? added? need to be recompiled, right?
That depends on whether or not you physically changed the displacement of fields that those other programs do reference or, if the copybook was used to define a record layout, you changed the length of that record.
Information is power but you are not really providing enough of it for anybody to provide an absolute answer. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
vijay_bn79
New User
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 Posts: 48 Location: Hyderabad
|
|
|
|
Hi..,
What i mean is.., if you change anything in the copy book or in the program and if you are not recompiling means it will take the old load module i mean it will consider the old program and old copy book only and it wont consider the new program or new copy book..,
so the changes wont affect to the other programs if those programs not compiled |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jituitbhu
New User
Joined: 03 Jun 2005 Posts: 3 Location: Pune,India
|
|
|
|
Hi,
Whenever there is change in the copybook, it's good practice to recompile all the programs which are using the copybook. In this case, even if you don't recompile those programs which are not using this new 88-condition then also, there is not going to be any problem.
In case of any production abend in the program, the production support team may refer to the modified copybook and so it can create confusion to the production support team if not recompiled before. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Arun Raj
Moderator
Joined: 17 Oct 2006 Posts: 2481 Location: @my desk
|
|
|
|
Hi
Thank u so much.This is exactly what I wanted to know.I hope you understood my problem with the information provided.Thank u all
Regards. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cooldebi
New User
Joined: 19 Apr 2006 Posts: 18 Location: mumbai
|
|
|
|
Archna,
Recomplie all the programs in which that
1. copybook is copied(in the working storage section) ..or
2. if it is passed to any other subroutine with the commarea(if it is an online code)..then compile those subroutines |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|