× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.


  • Subject: Re: show message on line 24
  • From: Evan Harris <spanner@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 07:20:25 +1200


Dan

>Am I the only one who has, many times, lamented the fact that IBM failed to
>open up the second-level text for these two message IDs?

No, I have bemoaned this fact many times. I console myself with the thought 
that the majority of users don't hit F1 once let alone twice :)

>I realize that I *could* create a new message description, but I would, by
>most standards, have to create it in a user-defined message file (and NOT
>QCPFMSG).  OS upgrades and, possibly, PTFs could replace the QCPFMSG msgfile.
>Even if I didn't have to worry about that, other clients' 400's may have
>already defined a message ID that I had intended to use for my purposes.

If you create a purpose-built message file in your own library then none of 
this ought to affect you. I have kind of come round to the idea that the 
CPF9898 message is OK as a pinch hitter but all the hassle of a message 
file and defining the variables etc is probably worth it in the long run if 
you generate lots of messages (as I do)

The thing that convinced me of this is the fact that subsequent 
interpretation of the message was possible by storing the message data and 
the Message ID. For example if I have a message I use that says "Subsystem 
XXXXXX not ready yet" I am able at some later stage to get a list of all 
the subsystems that weren't ready by using the message data values - this 
is assuming I have the message data and the message ID stored somewhere ! 
Compare this to the thought of having to break down every one of the 
message strings....

I guess my conclusion eventually was CPF9898 was OK for progress messages, 
ad-hoc one-off messages etc but any serious use of messages - indicated IMO 
by needing the extra features IBM's messages offer - means doing the kind 
of work IBM did to build the CPF message file.

Just my take :)

Cheers
Evan Harris

+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.