Re: Get Program Verifier into TurnOver -- CODE400-L

Sam,
I took Hak's advice (shown below) and contacted SoftLanding again.  My
request was understood and was forwarded to a developer there.  I also
requested that the macros be given to IBM for a future service pack.
Previously, I was not sure who was responsible for TurnOver and CODE/400
integration and it turns out that SoftLanding wrote the TurnOver macros.  I
told them that it was not a burning issue.  I pointed out to SoftLanding
that according to this list, the macros may have to be rewritten later for
the new IDE in Eclipse.  I said that I could wait if they wanted to just
write it for the new interface.  It appears that SoftLanding browses this
CODE/400 list and their developers are probably on top of the interface
changes.

Thanks,
Craig Strong

** Hak wrote:
Craig:
     to tell you the truth, I am not really familiar with the TurnOver. I
do not have this installed. Do you think that you can contact SoftLanding
Systems
for the problem? Hopefully, they will tell us what it is that CODE needs to
be done.

This is what I found for the contact:

SoftLanding Systems
techsupport@softlanding.com
(800) 545-9485



Hak Lui
AS/400 AD, IBM Canada Ltd.
e-mail: haklui@ca.ibm.com

>I don't use Turnover, but in Aldon's A/CMS I have a command that will set
my
>library list to what A/CMS would use to compile my program.  Are you sure
you
>don't have similar functionality somewhere in Turnover?

>Sam
>From: craigs@dekko.com
>Reply-To: code400-l@midrange.com
>To: code400-l@midrange.com
>Subject: Re: Get Program Verifier into TurnOver
>Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 15:33:33 -0500
>
>Scott,
>I like the TurnOver compile feature because it automatically sets up my
>library list and I would like that same functionality in the verify
through
>TurnOver. I shouldn't have said can't but instead said that it is not
>feasible to set up the library list any other way except through TurnOver
>(that is the problem). We have a complex environment here and I have
>counted over 66 application sets (library lists) that I choose from
whether
>I am working on BPCS, EDI, global utilities, etc. Upgrading to BPCS V8, we
>would be adding probably 30 more temporarily for awhile. There are even
>more on top of these. Each library list has an average of 15 libraries.
>Furthermore, if an application set changes library lists, or facilities
>merge, we would have to update all of the macros on our PC to reflect the
>changes in TurnOver. That would mean maintaining library lists in two
>places (multiplied by the number of programmers that would have to change
>macros to reflect changes on their PC). In a simple environment, we could
>pull it off and it probably wouldn't be a big deal, but not in our complex
>environment.
>That is why I really want a program verify tab through TurnOver like the
>TurnOver -> Compile -> Prompt (or No prompt). It is really important that
>the library list gets set up automatically through TurnOver.
>
>Thanks,
>Craig
>
>*** Scott wrote:
>Craig,
>
>I don't understand your problem. I use CODE/400 and Turnover. The
>'normal' Verify Program works fine for me. If it is a library list issue
>in CODE/400, you could use one of the macros that went flying across the
>list a little while ago to set the library list from within CODE/400.
>--
>------------------------------------------------------
>Scott P. Johnson
>Applications Development Team Coordinator
>Microcomputer Development Specialist
>IBM Certified Specialist - AS/400 RPG Programmer
>Highsmith Inc.
>W5527 Hwy 106, PO BOX 800
>Fort Atkinson, WI 53538-0800
>TEL: 920-563-9571 FAX: 920-563-7395
>sjohnson@highsmith.com
>www.highsmith.com
>------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> craigs@dekko.com
> Sent by: To:
>code400-l@midrange.com
> code400-l-admin@mi cc:
> drange.com Subject: Get Program
>Verifier into TurnOver
>
>
> 04/24/2002 12:25
> PM
> Please respond to
> code400-l
>
>
>
>
>
>
>I would really like to use the Program Verifier (Actions -> Verify
program)
>but I can't because I am editing source in CODE/400 from TurnOver change
>management.
>I have wanted this functionality for many months but I don't think the
>SoftLanding's TurnOver people understand what the advantages of Program
>Verify are. I keep looking for this but nothing comes up. I sent a
>request to SoftLanding to have Verify capabilities in CODE/400 from
>TurnOver and they rejected it and said to use the *NOGEN on the compile to
>accomplish the same thing. Wrong. I probably should have marketed it
>better and mentioned the advantages of Verify but I didn't think I needed
>to. Some of this was probably my fault.
>When editing source from TurnOver, the TurnOver menu with options of
>"Compile -> Prompt" and "Compile -> No prompt" pop up. I have used this
>happily for most of my programming for a long time because it uses the
>library list set up by TurnOver. Why can't there be a TurnOver verify
>option like the compile? Is there anyone using CODE/400 and TurnOver that
>would like the Program Verify option? Can there be a solution (or a
>workaround) and can IBM work with SoftLanding again to get this resolved
>like they did with the compile? Stay tuned. I doubt SoftLanding would
>listen to just my concern but if everyone who wants this capability speaks
>out, maybe it could become a reality. I would think if IBM wants to market
>the Verify function, they would want to have it work with the TurnOver
>library list and would get on SoftLanding's case. I would be interested to
>know what IBM thinks of this functionality and other future change
>management software integrations.
>NOTE: I, in no way, wish to belittle IBM or SoftLanding in any way. I have
>been impressed with the high level of customer support and the speed at
>which my problems were resolved from IBM and SoftLanding.
>
>My opinion of advantages of using the Program Verify option (which I
cannot
>use from TurnOver):
>I heard a long time ago that the main benefit of using the Program
Verifier
>lies in the cache option. It appears that the two advantages of using the
>cache is that it really speeds up the verifier and you can verify
>disconnected from the AS/400. I was able to verifying a program that took
>18 seconds uncached in 1 second cached. Keep in mind that the first time
>doing the cache on a verify still takes the normal verify or compile time
>but after that, you are really flying.
>
>I would really like to hear anyone's input on this subject and anything
you
>might know about the future of TurnOver with CODE/400.
>
>Thanks,
>Craig Strong
>