Re: V5R2 --> V5R3

That verbage (Output file (OUTFILE) changes Applications using
LVLCHK(*YES) may be affected...) appears to be the standard type of
warning found in the Memo to Users for each release. Everyone should use
LVLCHK(*NO) when working with outfiles and, as IBM adds new fields to the
end of existing outfile record formats, existing applications will
continue to work as is. This paragraph is intended for those developers
who use LVLCHK(*YES) and may get a level check even though their
application is not impacted (as the application certainly would not be
dependent on the newly added fields).

If a change were to be made to an outfile that was incompatible (changing
the definition of an existing field for instance) that type of change
would be explicilty called out in the Memo to Users -- this is rare, but
has happened due to significant changes in i5/OS that drove such an
incompatibility. Because the file (per my previous paragraph) should be
LVLCHK(*NO), this makes it critical that application developers read the
Memo to Users prior to upgrading to the next release in order to catch
these situations. If skipping a release, it is likewise critical to read
the Memo to Users for the target release AND any skipped over releases.

As the simple addition of new fields to an existing outfile (used with
LVLCHK(*NO)) is compatible with existing applications, there is no list of
"enhanced" outfile formats provided in the Memo to Users (or anyplace else
I'm aware of).

Using LVLCHK(*NO) with an outfile does provide a level of application
protection similiar to that found with System APIs.

Hope this helps,
Bruce Vining




rob@xxxxxxxxx
Sent by: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
04/05/2007 07:15 AM
Please respond to
Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>


To
Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
cc

Subject
Re: V5R2 --> V5R3






One of many reasons I often use APIs instead...

Did a little searching but I've not found anything yet.

Rob Berendt