Re: CF-Spec - another call for opinions

[dhandy@xxxxxxxxxxx (Douglas Handy)]

John,

> What you are talking about is object compatibility. That is not
>in question here. We are discussing source compatibility.

snip

>Finally, who is going to be doing a mass conversion in the first place? 

Not a mass conversion.  Just a mass recompile.

Have you ever changed a record format of a file that is widely used
numerous applications?  Do you use level checks?  Do you recompile
programs which use the file?

If Hans & Co cannot automagically determine the intended usage from
the context in an unambiguous manner (which *I thknk* should be doable
except where I described in earlier posts), then you have the
potential for a recompile to fail.

How big is this issue?  I think I could live with it, especially since
a temporary LVLCHK(*NO) typically works in my cases for input-only
file usage.

I also think the likelihood of name colisions is rather small, but not
nonexistant.

It also won't be an issue except in CF specs, so Bob will never have
to worry about it anyway.  In fact, he can't even mention it in his
book or classes since he refuses to mention CF there ... <g>

Doug
+---
| This is the RPG/400 Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---END