RE: Choice Programs

I understand what you mean after compiling and testing your program.  I
wonder if I am not asking for more trouble adding this to all of our
commands that use dates since they will still have to type the date in?

Art Tostaine, Jr.
CCA, Inc.
Parlin, NJ  08859


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-midrange-l@midrange.com
> [mailto:owner-midrange-l@midrange.com]On Behalf Of Douglas Handy
> Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 1998 7:29 PM
> To: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
> Subject: Re: Choice Programs
>
>
> Doug,
>
> >What do you mean that the value can't be returned to the
> command prompter?
> >Does that mean it also doesn't get passed to the CPP?  That
> is useless,
> >right?
>
> In the traditional design of choice programs, you return a list which
> the command prompter displays in subfile-like fashion on a panel
> titled "Specify Value for Paramteter XXXX", where it gives you the
> type of value expected, the prompt text, and a field for keying your
> desired value.
>
> The calendar display choice program I sent you via email formats the
> "return list" to look like calendars, and the operator still keys the
> date but with the benefit of being able to view a calendar.
>
> In the windowed version of a choice program, you gain the ability to
> manipulate the display but lose the ability to directly return the
> value to the command prompter.  Although not ideal, I still use this
> to enable F4 database lookups on master files.  What it does is put a
> wrapper around my standard lookup window for the file, letting the
> user type a position to entry, and select a record with option 1.  The
> wrapper choice program takes the return value from the lookup window,
> and since it can't pass it to the command prompter directly, uses it
> as the text of the "return list".  The command prompter than insists
> on showing the "Specify Value for Parameter XXXX", and the operator
> has to key the value now shown on the display.
>
> I would *love* to eliminate this extraneous screen.  But it beats
> losing the functionality altogether, or keying a value like *SELECT
> which tells the CPP to prompt for the value.  At least the operator
> only has to key the full value once, after using option 1 to identify
> the record in the lookup window.
>
> And if IBM would ever do us a big favor and add the ability to
> directly return a value to the command prompter, it would be trivial
> to change my choice programs.
>
> Doug
> +---
> | This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
> | To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
> | To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
> | To unsubscribe from this list send email to
> MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
> | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator:
> david@midrange.com
> +---
>

+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---