Re: QSHELL commands (was: Stmf copy with add)

James,

>Now this is an interesting comment because it reveals the difference
>between os/400 and other systems I have worked with:  os/400 commands are
>really database commands (i.e. they care about record relation) whereas
>commands from other systems are not.

I wouldn't say "OS/400 commands are really database commands".  But I would say
OS/400 commands are object-based.  So those which operate on a database file
know they are dealing with a database file, and act accordingly.  Likewise,
those which deal with a program know that too.  That is a *good* thing.

Personally, I *like* the fact the system knows that programs are not "files",
and can't be treated as data.  Ditto for other object types.

>I would also like to leave off unused parms instead of typing *n.

The basic ways of identifying parameters are:
  1) Positional
  2) Keyword
  3) Switch

OS/400 uses 1 and/or 2; *nix uses 1 and/or 3.  All you are saying is that you
prefer switches over keywords.  The smaller the command set, the easier that is
to agree with.  But OS/400 is hardly a small command set.

>> Whoa!  Users should not need to key commands very often, if ever.
>
>Why not?  Shouldn't a user be able to use the system?

I said no such thing -- I said they shouldn't *need* to use a *command line*
often.  I don't want my users typing in CP commands.  If they can't do their job
easily without a command line, then I haven't done my job.

OTOH, you can't rely on the absence of a command line for security either.

>In other words, how would the user interaction be different if the commands
>were easier to enter.

User interaction?  On the systems I support, it would be no different.  And for
support staff which do use a command line, it *is* easy.  I use positional
parameters all the time.  And I'll make duplicate commands with short, mneumonic
(cryptic?) names for personal ad hoc use -- sometimes with different defaults --
just to have a very fast method to key something from a command line.

But frankly, given the volume of commands which exist on the 400, I *like* the
(former?) consistency of the command naming and keyword naming.  And the ability
to prompt a command, or a keyword.  Or type GO CMDxxx.  Or [SLTCMD] xxx*.  Or a
host of other options

And that my application commands have all the same capabilities.  I always
create commands for everything.  I never use CALL for a top-level program.

>doskey?  what's that?

Makes the command line under DOS more paletable.  You see, I use command lines
all the time too, so I know whereof you speak.  I still like OS/400 commands.

>From a DOS prompt, key DOSKEY /Help for simple instructions.  It adds much
better command history, macros, etc.

Doug