Andy, And I think ANYBODY who disagrees with me MUST be a *nix gearhead...;-)) (PLEASE note emoticon...!) One of the toughest choices all programmers face is when is it worth learning two similar techniques. (Not to drift off into another list, but...) Tables and/or arrays...? SETLL/READE (same klist) and/or CHAIN...?? SQL and/or OPNQRYF...?!? So I had to ask myself, if I didn't know anything about OS/400, would I take the trouble to learn both CPY and/or CRTDUPOBJ? From what you just posted, CPY is more versatile (handles both IFS and CPYF). However, CPY ignores the advantages of verb/subject command structure, a consistent approach, and causes excessive potential for errors coding the object name. This last is my hangup. Even more, this documentation is intended for the customer-base, which largely prefers the traditional commands. Might be a good survey question (hint, hint ;-), but I'm fairly sure that even amongst tool vendors, they prefer the traditional. IMV, this documentation overlooks who the primary customer base is... (And this list is a small subset of those hundreds of thousands, at that, so a survey here is likely to only be partially accurate.) If I didn't have to "chop the wood and carry the water" (ie sweeping, etc.), I'd give an example of proof-positive that I'm not unaware of how personal preferences factor large in coding... But I think these things come down to shop standards, because, IMV, it is the skill-level of the shop (which varies over time) which ultimately determines which techniques are more effective. But I think personal preference is VERY over-used, and ignores the reality that there ARE better ways, and worse ways... Sure there's gradation.. of course, it's rarely black-and-white. But there are MORE effective and LESS effective techniques, although there isn't always agreement on which are which... Again, JMNSHO... jt | -----Original Message----- | From: email@example.com | [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On Behalf Of Andy Nolen-Parkhouse | Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2001 2:09 PM | To: email@example.com | Subject: RE: CPY instead of CRTDUPOBJ ? (was: CD Burning software?) | | | David, | | Personal preference strikes me as a good enough reason. Perhaps also a | bit of showboating. Both CPY and CRTDUPOBJ will achieve the same | result. | | Regards, | Andy Nolen-Parkhouse | | > Ok, bit of confusion here ... on the above web page they reference | copying | > a program ... but they use IFS CPYcommand to do the copy instead of | > regular | > CRTDUPOBJ. | > | > Any ideas why?
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.