×
The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.
IMHO, it would be a very odd case where you'd want an application to
refer to QTEMP when it normally refers to a production library. In
fact, I'd wager it's a programmer trying to test code.
In that situation, the user (programmer) could easily use OVRDBF or add
QTEMP to the library list on the fly.
I don't think it's a good argument for having QTEMP in the QUSRLIBL
sysval or even in the JOBD.
Let's face it, folks... the only reason QTEMP needs to be in the library
list (aside from adding it on-the-fly for testing code) is because of
all the poorly written software out there. In this market space, poorly
written software absolutely ABOUNDS -- or, at least, that's been my
experience.
Crispin wrote:
In general, that's probably a good idea. But what if, for example, you have
a (CL) program that does some processing on a file. The application may want
to use that program for the QTEMP version of the file, or for an Application
library version of the file.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact
[javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.
midrange.com
