Exactly. That it "has not happened" there is why I pointed out there
were /assumptions/ that may not hold elsewhere; e.g. the assumption that
no other program or user has effected CHGJRN JRNRCV(named|*GEN) since
the last time the program ran. As an assumption not explicitly informed
of in the program source, opens the potential that another user of that
source might encounter difficulties [and possibly not even know it].
Since at least two individuals expressed interest in the approach, I
took the time to point out obvious assumptions that the CLP source made;
so that if adopted, they might prevent encountering mistakes rather than
learning from them. Although I had contemplated doing so before the
other posts were made, I did not, good or bad, because I inferred the
current usage was deemed acceptable within its operating environment.
I'm not sure that I understand your comment about potential problems
with the way the program uses the 'CHGJRN JRNRCV()' command. Are you
referring to the possibility of some external process triggering a
CHGJRN that is never harvested by the auditing report? In our
environment that has not happened in more than ten years, perhaps
because we're a small shop and all programming requests are vetted by
me. Note I'm not challenging your assertion - just pointing out that
it hasn't happened here.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2019 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact