In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 08/29/2005
at 10:49 PM, "R.S." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>Maybe it's not obvious, but all the
>compilation work is done by computer itself (no human attendance),
>the result is the list of compilation errors.
It may be "obvious" to you, but it isn't true. The result includes the
generated object code.
>I can recompile any of my application programs and I'm quite sure
>that it will work unchanged
ROTF,LMAO! Your faith is touching.
>this is due to code management tool which assures that compiled
>version on Prod system comes from the source in "master" library.
No, it's due to your failure to understand that different compilers
can generate different object code from the same source.
>Another pro for mass recompilation is you detect problems before
>they could occur in real life.
No, that's a pro for regression testing.
>You have time to analyze and fix it,
Not if you insist on promoting all clean compiles to production
untested. But it's not my dog.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
