× 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.


  1.  Home
  2. MIDRANGE-L
  3. January 2008

Re: QTEMP cleanup

rob wrote:

I'm not so sure I'd solely rely on the end of the job doing my cleanup of QTEMP objects.
I'm not saying that it won't do so. My concern is if someone injects your program in the middle of another job stream. For example if your program creates a file called TEMPFILE and now it gets added to the middle of a job stream where there was already a TEMPFILE in QTEMP then you're toast.

I had no idea there was this controversy over QTEMP in *LIBL. I got burnt badly, many years ago bu the thinking that I could understand the job by looking at individual programs in isolation. I think the last time I injected a program into a job stream without looking at the program in an existing job stream was 1979 or so.

All of the objections and counter-objections seem predicated on the idea that a programmer commonly modifies a job stream (interactive jobs included) without looking at the whole job first. Does that happen in the real world? I'd have been fired if I made that mistake twice.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...
Follow-Ups:
Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

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.