Re: Will IBM ever expand system object names?

What if this existed?

CRTBNDRPG PGM(MYPGM) LONGNAME(MYLONGPROGRAMNAME) .....

and at some point you just like:

CALL LONGPGMN(MYLONGPROGRAMNAME)

And this would work for new applications. Why not?


El mié, 29 may 2024 a las 11:19, James H. H. Lampert via MIDRANGE-L (<
midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>) escribió:

On 5/29/24 10:01 AM, Javier Sanchez wrote:

Why would an expansion in system object names cause headaches?

It would break a great deal of software that uses record-level access.

Every single system API that deals with objects in the QSYS.LIB file
system assumes that a fully qualified object name in that file system
consists of a 10-character library name, a 10-character object name, a
10-character member name, for database files, and a 10-character object
type, for APIs that deal with multiple object types.

The same is true for CL commands.

--
JHHL
--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at https://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

Please contact support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related
questions.