And back to CRTRPGMOD I go. Heh. I'll stick with ignoring what I'm used to ignoring vs having to change the define based on the type of object I'm working on.
Kurt Anderson
Sr. Programmer/Analyst - Application Development, Service Delivery Platform
-----Original Message-----
From: Kurt Anderson
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 9:23 AM
To: 'Rational Developer for IBM i / Websphere Development Studio Client for System i & iSeries'
Subject: RE: [WDSCI-L] RDi 9.1.1 Verify INCORROUT?
Thanks for bringing this up Buck. This is one of those message from the verifier that I've always ignored. Now I don't have to anymore.
Kurt Anderson
Sr. Programmer/Analyst - Application Development, Service Delivery Platform
-----Original Message-----
From: WDSCI-L [mailto:wdsci-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Buck Calabro
Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2015 1:00 PM
To: wdsci-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [WDSCI-L] RDi 9.1.1 Verify INCORROUT?
On 1/6/2015 12:44 PM, Edmund Reinhardt wrote:
But Barbara's approach has the advantage that you don't have to
generate PCML to a file.
Yes, I rather like Barbara's solution. The PCML option is an interesting one, but less useful for my own personal workflow.
As as aside, it doesn't look as though the PCML preferences allow for metacharacters in the names; you know - &L, &N, and the other 'PDM-like'
choices. Am I missing something in the PCML workflow, or would I really have to remember to hit the preferences before doing every Verify where I wanted PCML?
--
--buck
'I had nothing to offer anybody except my own confusion' - Jack Kerouac
--
This is the Rational Developer for IBM i / Websphere Development Studio Client for System i & iSeries (WDSCI-L) mailing list To post a message email: WDSCI-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit:
http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/wdsci-l
or email: WDSCI-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at
http://archive.midrange.com/wdsci-l.
midrange.com
