Re[2]: CHGPF Question -- MIDRANGE-L

>On 19 Sep 97 at 9:12, Buck Calabro wrote:
>
>> >And still others (myself included) consider it to be punishable by
>> >death...
>>  Why?  LVLCHK(*NO) is just another attribute of a file, like SIZE or
>> MAXMBRS...  If I create a file with 10 fields, write a hundred
>> programs, then add an eleventh field to the end, why should I be
>> forced to re-compile all one hundred programs, when I already KNOW
>> that none of them uses the new field?  I have never given this
>> question much thought before; seeing these quite strong responses
>> against the practise gives me pause....
>
>Buck:
>
>IMHO, Level Checking is one of the shining features of the AS/400. 
>It gives you the security of knowing that your files and programs
>are compatible.   I would far prefer to have a program fall over
>dead because of a level check error, than run the program w/o LVLCHK
>and run the risk of SOME OTHER program screwing up the data. 
>
>If you defeat this feature, you throw your entire database's 
>integrity into question..
>
>Again, this is all IMHO..

David,
        I understand where you're coming from, and I completely agree
with the basic idea, but consider my particulars:
* No documentation tool.  Finding all the programs that reference a
   file is an arduous chore.  This means I'm not going to miss a few
   programs; I'll miss a bunch.  The client is _very_ impressed by 
   the quality of my work when her billing fails to run...
* Some of my jobs do a SBMJOB CMD(CALL someRPG)  No CL.  That
   means if it falls over, the client never knows about it until the data
   is whacked.   Yes, I fix 'em when I find 'em, but they're still out there...
* The integrity problem is already worse than you probably imagine:
   Because this stuff was mostly converted from S/36, the folks who did
   the original AS/400 work did not understand decimal data errors very
   well.  They changed the default CRTRPGPGM command to 
   IGNDECERR(*YES).  That's right: we ALLOW decimal data errors in
   the database.  (NOT my idea!!!)  If I can't make headway against THAT, 
   then I have little hope against something that's less harmful 
   (adding a field to the end.)

When I was with my previous employer, we used Pathfinder and NEVER
did LVLCHK(*NO) because we were very confident that we knew all the
programs involved...  I wish I could do that again, but that is "pie in the 
sky."

Buck Calabro
Commsoft, Rensselaer, NY


+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to "MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com".
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MAJORDOMO@midrange.com
|    and specify 'unsubscribe MIDRANGE-L' in the body of your message.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---