On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 9:36 AM, Vernon Hamberg
<vhamberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
So the docs are at least confusing, right?
Actually, I think the docs are just plain wrong, now.
I disagree with Kurt, because the manual in fact very carefully and
explicitly goes over both the successful and unsuccessful cases, and
spells them out very clearly, even mentioning specifically that "no
record found" is in the "not completed successfully" case. I mean,
it's a model of Chuck Pencian thoroughness and precision.
The docs are absolutely clear and unequivocal, and the behavior
clearly does not match the docs. (I tested it just now, and was
surprised by the result.)
The reason I use the word "now" when I say the docs are wrong is that
I could have sworn, back in the day, that I encountered the behavior
that the docs are describing. Namely, immediately following an
unsuccessful chain, the next read was unsuccessful.
Either the behavior was changed sometime between V5R2 and 7.1, or I am
just imagining that I encountered the doc-described behavior. Which is
entirely possible - I have been a rule-follower for most of my life,
as well as someone who reads all available instructions before doing
anything. With the docs so utterly, unmistakably clear, I may well
have just taken it as a given that the read would fail in that
situation, and simply never allowed it to happen in my code.
John Y.
midrange.com
