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

I've seen it a few times.. it's rare, but they do it... and
it stinks.

On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 11:40:06 -0700
 "James H H Lampert" <jamesl@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 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.
> 

Bradley V. Stone
BVS.Tools
www.bvstools.com