Patrick O'Keefe wrote:
Miguided nor not, one or more of the above have been thrown
out. You could submit a formal request to have this restriction
lifted but I bet it won't get very far. Changing the code to remove
the restriction is probably trivial. Validating that change didn't
break something would probably be VERY expensive. It would
surely have to be implemented as part of a new release. And it
is absolutely guaranteed that it would break customers' use of
system symbols because of the absence of length checking that
hadn't been needed before.
Why would existing definitions suddenly "break" if the length
restriction on symbolic values was removed? Seems to me that it would be
a transparent change.
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800
Los Angeles, CA 90045
310-338-0400 x318
[email protected]
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
