RE: WHAT was IBM THINKING?!?!?, Re: QSYGETPH API

I don't understand your comments. I just now looked in the info center ar both 
vr5r3 and v5r2 for qsysgetph and the parameters are exactly the same.  


-----Original Message-----
    From: "James H H Lampert"<jamesl@xxxxxxxxxxx>
    Sent: 9/14/05 1:40:06 PM
    To: "midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx"<midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
    Subject: WHAT was IBM THINKING?!?!?, Re: QSYGETPH API
    
    What in the <censored> was IBM thinking when they broke 
    the <blasphemy> <obscenity> <vulgarity> QSYGETPH API in 
    V5R3, such that it now requires <censored> parameters that 
    didn't even <censored> exist when the API was first 
    defined?
    
    Have they somehow forgotten the basic <censored> concept 
    of an API? Have they somehow forgotten that an API, by 
    definition, is a fixed, documented system call that can be 
    trusted not to change in any way that would break existing 
    code? Or have they suddenly decided to act like 
    <blasphemy> Microschlong, and tell all outside commercial 
    product developers to <obscenity> <anatomically improbable 
    bodily function>?
    
    --
    JHHL
    -- 
    This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
    To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
    To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
    visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
    or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
    Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
    at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.