|
Rob: On Tue, 07 August 2001, rob@dekko.com wrote: > No, it seems like you understand my point. We just differ. I feel that > the command should be consistent, qualified or not. You feel that there > should be some 'back door' to override the efforts to standardize a shop. How long has it been since you looked at how many PARMs are available for CrtCtlAPPC? and all the dependencies? I picked that command as an example because it's complex, but plenty others exist that are also complex. Coding CL so that _EVERY_ parm value on _EVERY_ command is specified including _EVERY_ possible default value would get horrendously complex in a hurry. I'd say that's especially true because you'd have to go back to _EVERY_ existing CLP and fill in everything. No, I don't mean you individually. I'm referring to any 3rd-party software vendor who includes CL anywhere including via calls to QCMDEXC, QCMDCHK, QCAPCMD or what ever. Third-party software suppliers need some kind of reference to rely upon. This can usually be counted on as being the command definitions supplied by IBM in QSYS. If that reference specification couldn't be counted on, if an exit program forced every reference to any command named CRTCTLAPPC (no matter what library) to use specific parm values possibly contradictory to objects or attributes of objects created by other sections of code, if the 3rd-party developers had no possible way of knowing what standardization was being forced, chaos could result. Attempting to run a CLP written even the previous day would yield "unpredictable results". For the sake of discussion, let's say that a company decided to standardize printerfile names and attributes. The exit program enforced this standardization by forcing values. But a 3rd-party application has it's own internal naming structure and required attributes that are expected to avoid any conflicts with customer printerfiles, so an OVRPRTF command is executed to guarantee specific parm values. Ideally, 'QSYS/OVRPRTF' can be used to get a level of confidence. But you want to take that away? Would you even trust every in-house program written in the past? Which commands would you feel comfortable hadn't been "standardized"? If you were(are?) a 3rd-party developer, how do you propose providing product support? Interesting times dead ahead. Tom Liotta -- Tom Liotta The PowerTech Group, Inc. 19426 68th Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 Phone 253-872-7788 Fax 253-872-7904 http://www.400Security.com ___________________________________________________ The ALL NEW CS2000 from CompuServe Better! Faster! More Powerful! 250 FREE hours! Sign-on Now! http://www.compuserve.com/trycsrv/cs2000/webmail/ +--- | 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 +---
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 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.
midrange.com
