On 15/03/2023 8:33 am, Jay Maynard wrote:
That's because SMP/E and its power are only truly present in the z/OS and predecessors world. Everyone else thinks of applying maintenance as a matter of replacing the entire product, instead of individual fixes that are automatically maintained and managed.
The problem with individual fixes rather than full replacement is that it means the interface for every individually replaceable component is fixed. The relationships between all components need to be tracked, and any interface change needs corresponding pre-reqs or co-reqs for everything that uses it.
That had to be done anyway when everything was coded in assembler. With high level languages it becomes much easier to do at compilation time. The compiler will find the relationships and make sure all dependent changes happen.
Separate modules also limit compiler optimizations, because calls between routines are one of the common opportunities for optimization (inlining etc).
It's still possible to ship individual fixes if necessary, but that is done in source code using git etc., still shipped as a full replacement. You end up with a branch or tag in git that represents the exact code that a customer is running.
There is much more overhead and opportunity for error shipping individual components than full replacement. With the bandwidth etc. available now full replacement makes much more sense.
-- Andrew Rowley Black Hill Software ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
