RE: CPY instead of CRTDUPOBJ ? (was: CD Burning software?)

Andy,

And I think ANYBODY who disagrees with me MUST be a *nix gearhead...;-))

(PLEASE note emoticon...!)


One of the toughest choices all programmers face is when is it worth
learning two similar techniques.  (Not to drift off into another list,
but...) Tables and/or arrays...?  SETLL/READE (same klist) and/or CHAIN...??
SQL and/or OPNQRYF...?!?

So I had to ask myself, if I didn't know anything about OS/400, would I take
the trouble to learn both CPY and/or CRTDUPOBJ?  From what you just posted,
CPY is more versatile (handles both IFS and CPYF).

However, CPY ignores the advantages of verb/subject command structure, a
consistent approach, and causes excessive potential for errors coding the
object name.  This last is my hangup.

Even more, this documentation is intended for the customer-base, which
largely prefers the traditional commands.  Might be a good survey question
(hint, hint ;-), but I'm fairly sure that even amongst tool vendors, they
prefer the traditional.  IMV, this documentation overlooks who the primary
customer base is...  (And this list is a small subset of those hundreds of
thousands, at that, so a survey here is likely to only be partially
accurate.)


If I didn't have to "chop the wood and carry the water" (ie sweeping, etc.),
I'd give an example of proof-positive that I'm not unaware of how personal
preferences factor large in coding...  But I think these things come down to
shop standards, because, IMV, it is the skill-level of the shop (which
varies over time) which ultimately determines which techniques are more
effective.


But I think personal preference is VERY over-used, and ignores the reality
that there ARE better ways, and worse ways...  Sure there's gradation.. of
course, it's rarely black-and-white.  But there are MORE effective and LESS
effective techniques, although there isn't always agreement on which are
which...


Again, JMNSHO...

jt

| -----Original Message-----
| From: midrange-l-admin@midrange.com
| [mailto:midrange-l-admin@midrange.com]On Behalf Of Andy Nolen-Parkhouse
| Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2001 2:09 PM
| To: midrange-l@midrange.com
| Subject: RE: CPY instead of CRTDUPOBJ ? (was: CD Burning software?)
|
|
| David,
|
| Personal preference strikes me as a good enough reason.  Perhaps also a
| bit of showboating.  Both CPY and CRTDUPOBJ will achieve the same
| result.
|
| Regards,
| Andy Nolen-Parkhouse
|
| > Ok, bit of confusion here ... on the above web page they reference
| copying
| > a program ... but they use IFS CPYcommand to do the copy instead of
| > regular
| > CRTDUPOBJ.
| >
| > Any ideas why?