RE: Level Check Question (jt)

midrange-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

>   1. RE: Level Check Question (jt)
>
>For wish list: I wish DDS level-check calculation had same *PREVIOUS
>binder-source facility that ILE programs had, so fields could be added at
>end (as they ALWAYS should be), WithOut causing a level check in a pgm that
>doesn't need the new fields.  A colleague (sp?) and I were considering
>possible advantages of implementing ALL I/O through ILE modules, for this
>reason.

Isn't this a practical side-effect of DDS LFs anyway? As long as (1) the LF 
_explicitly_ lists fields and (2) programs use the LF to access the data, there 
should be no problems if new fields are added to the PF nor if the fields are 
rearranged in the PF. (It doesn't matter if fields are added at the end, in the 
middle or wherever.)

If the new field is needed in a given program, that program obviously needs to 
be recompiled anyway. Create a new LF to include the new field. Ideally, the 
access path will be shared with the old LF, so nothing much is really added to 
the system -- just a new data definition.

Programs using old LFs shouldn't need to be recompiled although the old LFs 
themselves do (though I'm not clear why they _have_ to be other than that's the 
way DB2/400 was written.)

Tom Liotta

-- 
Tom Liotta
The PowerTech Group, Inc.
19426 68th Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
Phone  253-872-7788 x313
Fax    253-872-7904
http://www.powertech.com


__________________________________________________________________
Introducing the New Netscape Internet Service. 
Only $9.95 a month -- Sign up today at http://isp.netscape.com/register

Netscape. Just the Net You Need. 

New! Netscape Toolbar for Internet Explorer
Search from anywhere on the Web and block those annoying pop-ups.
Download now at http://channels.netscape.com/ns/search/install.jsp