At 8/26/2006 04:04 PM, PRelson wrote:
I can only say "I am astonished" that someone would code based on
the presence of a field name. We have every right to define fields
in any level of macros that are convenient.
Peter,
Your "astonishment" only shows your own limitations. Just because you
did not think of a technique, does not mean that it's not both
reasonable and useful.
I'm guessing that your astonishment arises because you do not
distribute source code across multiple OS releases, and so you are
not all that familiar with (or sympathetic to) the issues that arise.
Roland's technique is very reasonable considering that for many
decades you did not provide any of us with an alternative. Thank you
for finally providing SYSSTATE_OSREL.
Now if only you would consider some of the other design problems with
SYSSTATE which I described to you last November and which you ignored
(specifically, my suggestion about implementing a "SYSSTATE
OSREL=RUNTIMECHECK" capability).
PRelson wrote:
We have every right to define fields in any level of macros that are
convenient.
"Rights" tend to change over time, and they tend to accrue to those
who can control them. Since you are in a position of power relative
to us, you seem to have "every right" to decide exactly what your "rights" are.
Dave Cole REPLY TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cole Software WEB PAGE: http://www.colesoft.com
736 Fox Hollow Road VOICE: 540-456-8536
Afton, VA 22920 FAX: 540-456-6658
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
