Jon Paris wrote:

On 12-Mar-09, at 4:00 PM, Chris Chambers wrote:

I would always call a CL program from within the COBOL.

QCMDEXC is just so ugly

And CL is therefore by definition "pretty"? You are jesting surely.

No, but then compiled CL has the CL compiler to help with a number of things. Granted, for trivial stuff like individual overrides, a compiled module is more than what's needed. But I see too many instances of multiple commands being constructed in strings and then passed on to be 'interpreted' by QCMDEXC/QCAPCMD, plus the supporting code to retrieve inner messages, plus excess code to handle quoted values... etc.

A compiled CL module makes a lot of those things so much nicer. It also allows some modularity, as well as providing an object that can be tested independently.

This comment is more about _overuse_ of QCMDEXC/QCAPCMD than appropriate use. Setting an override seems appropriate use.

Tom Liotta


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2021 by midrange.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 on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.