On Fri, 24 Jan 2014 08:25:22 -0500, Peter Relson wrote: >>I would much favor a convention that reports the truncation as an error. >>Then it's up to the caller to handle or ignore it. > >I don't disagree with your preference, but you are talking about changing >thousands or millions of lines of code, and likely creating significant >incompatibilities. > >Ain't gonna happen. > It was you who said earlier:
On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 07:35:19 -0500, Peter Relson wrote: > ... >Having said that, we are considering a convention under which symbol >values can be longer than the symbol name, with the user's understanding >that any truncation that results may be ignored. > What does the service that elaborates symbols currently return in GR15? What "thousands or millions of lines of code" would need to be changed if that were specified as 0 for successful substitution and 4 for truncation? But, I grant that callers of such a service now expect no truncation. SYMDEF itself ought to return with Warning status if a value longer than the name is requested. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
