Peter,
I agree that "different folks have different purposes"; yes, everything
"just depends" ~ That's my motto... JUST so long as there is a METHod to
someone's MADness <s>...
Now, having said that, in this case, in my opinion, it would seem more
appropriate to perphaps put "bug fixes" in say the corporate layer, where
every application could take advantage of the changes, thereby also
avoiding duplication of effort (when we know that humans are prone to eroor
<g>). So then what would be left to use the PFE layer for? Seems like
extra baggage to me.
In addition, for some "bug fixes", say where there is already a newer PFC
release out that has a particular fix (and your company is not yet ready
for a full-fledged migration), I even condone making the "fix" straight to
the PFC layer itself.
Furthermore, far be it from me to eevverrr question the BORG <g>...
Resistance is futile, Peter, you will be assimilated <bg>
Even so, "To each his own!" <sb>
Cheers,
~Sharon
--
Sharon Weinstrom Buntz | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cheat Sheet for PFC/PB Help | http://www.pfccheatsheet.com/
Peter Brawley wrote:
>
> Sharon, different folks have different purposes. No "whole purpose" is valid for
> everyone. On matters like this "good practice" and "bad practice" depend on the
> approach you've taken. For us pfc/pfe generality, pbl/pbd sharing and inter-version
> migration simplicity are much more important than the convenience of putting
> app-specific customisations in the pfe layer. We put _only_ bug fixes in the pfe
> layer; we like this approach both for the pfc -- corpPbl -- pfe architecture and for
> the pfc -- pfe -- customPbl architecture.
>
> Peter Brawley
>
> -----------
>
> Sharon Buntz wrote:
>
> > Al,
> >
> > > our practice is to freeze the PFE among applications
> >
> > But that defeats the whole purpose of creating a new, extra, corporate
> > "PFD" level in the first place! When you go through the extra effort and
> > all of adding the extra PFD layer, the PFE level is then intended to be
> > application-specific as pictured here
> >
> > http://www.pfcguide.com/pfcmag/extension_page04.asp#Adding_an_Additional
> > layer
> > (See Figure 14 there and the "Limitations" there as well)
> >
> > Otherwise, you would simply opt to use the PFE layer directly as your
> > corporate (framework) level as pictured here
> >
> > http://www.pfcguide.com/pfcmag/extension_page03.asp#PFE_as_a_Framework_Layer
> >
> > Please realize that all it takes is one, single extra instance variable or
> > one, single extra function in the PFE (application) level... And then you
> > enter into what Steve Benfield calls the "GPF-Tug-Of-War" (for your
> > corporate 3-layer approach) !
> >
> > Don't get me wrong here... The "GPF-Tug-Of-War" is not the enemy, it is a
> > fact of a PowerBuilder programmer's regeneration life. So adding instance
> > variables or functions in the PFE layer is not considered "bad practice",
> > but rather it is the normal or expected practice. The bad practice would
> > be to not realize the "GPF-Tug-Of-War" possibilities and to not take the
> > necessary precautions ;-)
> >
> > PFCly Yours,
> > Have fun,
> > ~Sharon
> > --
> > Sharon Weinstrom Buntz | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Cheat Sheet for PFC/PB Help | http://www.pfccheatsheet.com/
> >
> > Al Malin wrote:
> > >
> > > Russ,
> > >
> > > What you say is absolutely true and we are in total agreement. One definately
> > > needs to understand your point that changing the PFE could indirectly change
> > > the PFC as well.
> > >
> > > But I stand by my statement. Yes, I can share the PBDs since our practice is
> > > to freeze the PFE among applications. We freeze the PFE because when you
> > > change it for an application then the PFE becomes application-specific and is
> > > no longer enterprise-general.
> > >
> > > (Needles to say, never ever think about changing the PFC without Powersoft's
> > > blessing and/or you know what you are doing and are prepared for future
> > > headaches.)
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Al Malin
> > >
> > > "Hensel, Russ" wrote:
> > >
> > > > You can share the pbl as long as you recompile for each individual app.
> > > > You cannot share the pbd's.
> > > >
> > > > Why?
> > > >
> > > > Because of the way that the pfc pfe are linked to each other
> > > > changes in the pfe layer can move up into the pfc layer.
> > > > ( look at w_pfc_master -> w_master -> w_pfc_sheet -> w_sheet and the
> > > > like )
> > > >
> > > > So if there are no changes that can "climb" back to the pfe and pfc
> > > > layers it may work, otherwise it will not.
> > > >
> > > > We keep one master copy of the pbl's as source, but always regenerate
> > > > them into the application that they will run with.
> > > >
> > > > russ
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Al Malin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > Sent: Friday, July 09, 1999 9:53 AM
> > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > Subject: Re: PFCSIG re: PFC6.0/Executable Creation -
> > > > ApplicationTerminalt ed ... Unresolveable external n_msg when linking
> > > > reference atline 3 in c reate eventof object a_pts
> > > >
> > > > We share PB6.5 PFC/PFE among applications too and we haven't had any
> > > > problems. We
> > > > believe there is nothing in the architecture that prohibits this.
> > > >
> > > > Al Malin,
> > > > Whirlpool Corp
> > > >
> > > > "BRIGHT,NIGEL" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Sharon,
> > > > >
> > > > > >. Seems like you are sharing your PFC/kme objects with another
> > > > application
> > > > > >(since you have a corporate level). If so, do you realize that cannot
> > > > > >share the PFC/kme/PFE PBDs between the two applications?
> > > > >
> > > > > Do you have any more detail on why you can`t do this.
> > > > > We have a number of apps sharing our PFC/CORP/PFE PBDs which have been
> > > > > working fine for several months.
> > > > >
> > > > > Robert,
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi PBers ....
> > > > > > I just started getting the following message and am at a loss at what's
> > > > > the
> > > > > > cause or how to go about debuggin ?? I created the executable
> > > > successfully
> > > > > a
> > > > > > few times during the past few weeks and the only changes have been to
> > > > > > application specific (PBLs)functionality...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any Ideas??
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Click on a_pts.exe
> > > > > > Application Terminated
> > > > > > Unresolveable external n_msg when linking reference at line 3 in create
> > > > > > event of object a_pts
> > > > >
> > > > > Not knowing the specific dependencies which might be involved; I assume
> > > > you
> > > > > tried doing a full rebuild of your app? And that the PBD libraries you
> > > > are
> > > > > running against are up to date?
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Nigel
> > > > >
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] HOSTED BY IIGG, INC. FOR HELP WITH LIST SERVE COMMANDS, ADDRESS
> A MESSAGE TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] WITH THE FOLLOWING MESSAGE: help pfcsig
> SEND ALL OTHER INQUIRES TO [EMAIL PROTECTED]
