Simon Coulter wrote:
If they wrote both the caller and the receiver then it is their problem. It's a programming defect.
They wrote both.
The vendors previous release ran on V5R1 and then on V5R3. When the current release was installed on V5R3 the problems appeared. Unfortunately the vendor (JDA) has a very very stong 'damn the torpedoes' approach to error handling. They trap virtually every error, erase all the traces and simply fail the job. We get almost no opportunity to take a dump or get a joblog.Interesting too that their previous release did not exibit this issue but the current one does. We seem to remember the programs were CL before and CLLE now. Shouldn't matter of course but it does seem to matter.CL programs and CLLE programs are created via different compilers so it is reasonable to expect that they handle storage differently. It is also possible that the behavioural difference is due simply to different releases of OS/400. For example; I had one problem where my code was walking off the end of a variable and writing data over unallocated storage. On 440 this worked without a problem but crashed on 510. All this means is that the storage I trashed was unused on 440. In both cases I still had a programming defect to correct. It could be that the previous program just happened to have blanks in storage after the 1 byte value but on 530 it has other variable data.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2015 by MIDRANGE dot 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 here. If you have questions about this, please contact