On Fri, 5 Jul 2019 22:45:12 +0000, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote:
>... If what's entered is not a real NetView command, you get this:
>
> REPLY INVALID. REPLY WITH VALID NCCF SYSTEM OPERATOR COMMAND
>
>This can easily happen if the operator tries to reply to a different WTOR but
>gets the number wrong. Often this WTOR remains in this state for weeks or
>months. Until the next IPL. You never know what it didn't like because the bad
>reply has rolled off immediately. So my final piece of advice. Whatever
>mechanism you settle on, don't be like NetView.
>
On our test floor (perhaps too many) engineers had operator authority
(I was among them.) I remember watching another novice trying to deal
with such as:
42 RESOURCE UNAVAILABLE. REPLY 'CANCEL' OR WAIT
R 42,WAIT
REPLY 'WAIT' INVALID
43 RESOURCE UNAVAILABLE. REPLY 'CANCEL' OR WAIT
R 43,WAIT
...
This process doesn't necessarily terminate. It would have
been far better if it were:
42 Resource unavailable. Wait or reply 'CANCEL'
... Keeping 'WAIT' out of the scope of recommended replies.
And using mixed case vs. upper case to differentiate instructions
to operator from suggested replies.
And one of my pet gripes is that the reply number is incremented
when the reply is rejected. It would be far more intuitive if it allowed
the operator to retry with *the*same* reply number. I know; WAD.
But the design is wrong in not considering that human factor.
-- gil
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
