Re: CRTDUPOBJ - WRKOBJPDM vs WRKOBJ

Vern gave a plausible explanation earlier in this thread, that the developer of PDM thought DATA(*YES) was more reasonable and hardcoded it in his program.

Actually, given IBM's propensity for protecting data, I'm more surprised that the CRTDUPOBJ default is DATA(*NO).

I have access to both v5r4 and v7r3 systems and the CRTDUPOBJ default is DATA(*NO).



On 5/25/2020 1:12 PM, Paul Therrien wrote:

Understood.

It's just that option 3 on WRKOBJ gives a CRTDUPOBJ DATA(*NO)
While WRKOBJPDM gives a CRTDUPOBJ with a DATA(*YES).
If my default for the CRTDUPOBJ command is DATA(*NO), why would the CRTDUPOBJ from WRKOBJPDM default to DATA(*YES)?

We are on 7.3 - do others see this on their system?


Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L <midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of
Vernon Hamberg
Sent: Monday, May 25, 2020 10:16 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
<midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: CRTDUPOBJ - WRKOBJPDM vs WRKOBJ

Hi Paul

First, the 4 version of CRTDUPOBJ are there for compiling CL to
previous releases. The normal daily usage is the one in QSYS.

Second, WRKOBJ is a basic system command, while WRKOBJPDM is a
developer (and maybe system administrator) tool with some assumptions.
Perhaps the designers of PDM decided that normal use of CRTDUPOBJ
would be to include the data. It appears that WRKOBJ makes no choices
for values, instead, it simply uses the defaults. Note that WRKOBJPDM
doesn't give you a choice about replacing an object that already
exists,