Paul Gilmartin wrote, re >>Just curious-when does it bite you?
>It broke a macro I wrote. I don't recall details. Went to SR. WAD. >With a sympathetic aside from development that while they sympathized >they found XEDIT logic so convoluted that they feared that any >attempted repair might cause worse collateral damage. Tsk. Whoever said that is a piker-I've been in the bowels of XEDIT and it's quite good code. I'm 99.44% sure, in fact, that reversing that would be trivial to fix. The thing is, there are surely macros that depend on it, so it would need to be SETtable-but that's also easy. They just didn't wanna. >> ... this would only matter in CMS UPDATE mode. >I was once a minor contributor in a distributed shareware develomment >project (Charlotte). Patches were submitted as CMS UPDATE. >I found XEDIT UPDATE inappropriate in that if I had second thoughts >and restored the previous content of a line, it appeared regardless in >the UPDATE as a replacement by an identical line. Interesting. I *always* look at my update decks to understand all changes and would have just manually fixed that, then re-XEDITed and resaved to make sure sequence increments etc. were fine. Never had a problem. But if you had some sort of automation around it, that might be hard, I know. >I abandoned XEDIT UPDATE and resorted to ISRSUPC UPDCMS8 >to produce my patches. > ... So I'm not challenging it being weird/irritating, just curious > when/how you even notice it! Maybe just if it's the ONLY thing you've done, > and then PQUIT says >DMSXSU577E File has been changed; type QQUIT to quit anyway? >I was trying to automate that in a macro on PF3. Yeah, that makes sense. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
