RE: LVLCHK *NO

Frankly I'm appalled that anyone would use LVLCHK(*NO).  There is just no 
excuse for that type of approach to software design.

Buzz Fenner
bfennerNS@jonesborocwl.org
Remove NS to reply

-----Original Message-----
From:   John P Carr [SMTP:jpcarr@tredegar.com]
Sent:   Friday, October 01, 1999 9:57 AM
To:     RPG400-L
Subject:        Re: LVLCHK *NO


>Colin,
>This use of LVLCHK(*NO) may be justifiable as a temporary expedient in an
>emergency fix. But throughout a package? No way on earth would I load a
>thing like that on any system I was responsible for.
>Dave Kahn

Recognize LVLCHK(*NO) for what it is,   

1.  Laziness 
2.  A definitive admission of the lack of Version/Change Control.

Don't do it Period. 

It's a protection insurance that "as John Hall has noted"  that the 
other platforms would give their "I-Teeth" to have.  

BTW,    Some may be suprised to know that you can change the KEYS of 
a file and it DOES NOT change the level check ID.    As well as many 
other changes to the file will not.

John Carr
EdgeTech
+---
| 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
+---

+---
| 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
+---