Re: Next release

["Mark Murphy/STAR BASE Consulting Inc." <mmurphy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Or just use the SEU line commands CC, MM, B, A, D, even O all work the same way as far as I can tell.

Mark Murphy
STAR BASE Consulting, Inc.
mmurphy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


-----Sam_L <lennon_s_j@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: ----- 
To: wdsci-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Sam_L <lennon_s_j@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 05/07/2015 05:10PM
Subject: Re: [WDSCI-L] Next release

Greg,

You may already know this, and it may not be a solution, but I mention 
it just in case it helps you cut/paste easier...

Alt-L marks (highlights) the line where the cursor is (use another Alt-L 
to mark a block of lines), Alt-C copies the marked line or lines to 
after the line where the cursor is, Alt-M moves the marked line or lines 
to after the line where the cursor is.  Alt-U will un-mark.

These are line oriented commands, and in my opinion, are much better 
than trying to use the standard windows keys. Once you've got the hang 
of it, it is remarkably quick and easy to copy and move code.

Sam


On 5/7/2015 2:39 PM, Greg Wilburn wrote:
> Neither one of those RFE's address my simple issue.  I had the binding directories listed in lower case.  Oops, it won't compile - But in RDi, I have no idea why.
> I do not want a joblog every time I compile a program.  If a program fails during the binding step, the joblog should be
> 1. Created
> 2. Displayed in RDi
>
> IBM is (and has been) pushing the use of RDi and modular programming (service programs and the like).  Very ironic that they are "not compatible" and this was somehow overlooked.
>
> I've been using RDi for well over a year now... many times I find myself going back to the green screen (several times today) because of silly issues with RDi.  One of those issues is errors during the binding step.  The other is the quirky implementation of copying/pasting a blocks of text (overlaying) like you can do with SEU.
>
> Don't get me wrong... there are many advantages.  But some days it feels like there are just as many disadvantages.
>
> Sorry for the rant.
>