Re: SEU Search options

On 04-Mar-2015 08:39 -0600, Vernon Hamberg wrote:

<<SNIP>> I have to believe that something can be written to retrieve
the settings and write them back to the user profile internals - this
would probably be a *SYSTEM level program, but it's being done now by
PDM, so????

I think I will still submit an RFE later, unless Greg or someone
else does first!

IMO a DCR to request that PDM add a parameter to the FNDSTRPDM command that adds the capability to request *not* to update the IPE with that particular invocation; i.e. the command\function, the operational aspects, and the particular /tree/ of the IPE are all owned by PDM, and only the PDM should be [not] updating their IPE, so asking of RDi seems indirect. With that support, *then* the RDi has a more direct capability for enhancement, to supply that explicit parameter specification on their invocations. Again, just my opinion.

FWiW, while I like a /previous/ (*PRV) capability, sometimes, as in this particular scenario, I really do not prefer how using the command outside of PDM has an impact within the WRKxxxPDM. I had noticed the effect on some rare occasions I used FNDSTRPDM outside of PDM; left sometimes many days later wondering "When did I do *that* to screw up my preferences?" Arguably, the Find String Using PDM (FNDSTRPFM) command might just as well have had non-required fields and simply replace all of those parameters with the special value *PRV that would be extracted\pre-filled by a Prompt Override Program (POP) when the command is prompted. And in that case, the function from option-25=find could have been implemented directly via the prompted command instead of PDM having designed and coded additionally, effectively the identical function, but using a separate PNLGRP object and probably separate program(s) to process those options.