Re: Sending exception messages from a CPP back to the caller

If you're a vendor and want to do multilingual support it's probably a
good idea to put that into your decision making.


Rob Berendt
--
IBM Certified System Administrator - IBM i 6.1
Group Dekko
Dept 1600
Mail to: 2505 Dekko Drive
Garrett, IN 46738
Ship to: Dock 108
6928N 400E
Kendallville, IN 46755
http://www.dekko.com





From: Alan Campin <alan0307d@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 11/06/2013 01:39 PM
Subject: Re: Sending exception messages from a CPP back to the
caller
Sent by: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx



I used to build custom message id with substitution variables and tons of
second level help but finally just started using CPF9898. Just a waste of
time because no one ever looked at any of it.

Don't know if you are interested but if you download any of my projects
from www.think400.dk/downloads.htm you will find a service program called
XVERRH. This is my standard error handler.

If you find an error, just issue a ERRH_Throw and you send an exception
message back and the message is logged and can be retrieved at a higher
level. Does all the work of error handling.


On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 11:27 AM, CRPence <CRPbottle@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 06-Nov 08:14 -0800, Jeff Young wrote:

I has been ages since I have had to do this.
Do I just send the message to *PRV or *EXT?

The CPP is /transferred to/ vs called from the Command Analyzer
feature, so the invoker of the command is the /previous/ caller in the
stack. The External message queue is a special location rather than the
effective stack [i.e. the call message queue], so avoid using that
except when specifically that target is desired; I believe there is even
a restriction for sending *ESCAPE messages there, I do not recall.

FWiW: If another program were left in the stack between the calling
program [e.g. a CLP invoking the command] and the CPP, then the message
would be sent previous to that [hopefully static] program name; i.e. the
message is sent relative, minus one caller, to the known and consistent
caller [typically by name, per "Call stack entry identifier"] of the CPP
from a *CMD invocation.

Do I need a special message id or can I use the generic CPF9898?

That generic message provided by the OS *can be* utilized, and
hard-coded or dynamically-built message data to describe the failure,
but that is IMO a poor choice as a /design/ decision. Certainly
qualifies for the various expressions prefixed with: /Good enough for/

--
Regards, Chuck
--
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.

--
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.


--
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.