Re: FW: Have you seen this? An improved way.

[Douglas Handy <dhandy1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Bob,

>Geesh, we're talking about the OPDESC keyword which is probably used in a
>handful of shops world wide. 

I'll defer to your wider exposure, though I think this is not accurate either.
We certainly have more than that talk about OpDesc support (or at least the lack
of it <g>) on this mailing list, though I recognize this list is not
representative of shops in general.

>So my interjection was focused on that particular point.

That wasn't at all clear from the context.  Simon quoted and asked you to
clarify this statement:

>> Remember OPDESC don't work properly prior to V5R1 when you have a parm 
>> in the list of parms that is CONST.

To me anyway, your statement suggested the problem was with the use of CONST and
not because of use with an unsupported declaration type.

>then I agree, I should have been more precise. But "disinformation"? Think
>about the number of incorrect responses that get posted on this and other
>forums each and every hour by people who seem to have a need to respond to
>question without actually knowing the answer... now that's disinformation.

However, your posts may be construed by some to have extra credibility because
of your stature within the RPG community.  Sorry if my choice of words came
across too strong.  I interpreted your statement to mean there was an issue with
OPDESC and CONST, which was fixed in V5R1.

Is / was there such an issue or change in V5R1?  If so I never ran into it,
though I only have V5R1 or later to test with now.

Doug