On 17 May 2004 at 1:06, P Witte wrote:

> Thats right; it could cause a mess in certain circumstances. The best way to
> do it cleanly is for the ownership to be specified during a job's creation
> time.

Yes!

> > There is no OS facility to do that change safely.
> > I'm pretty sure many people on this list can knock up a small Sbasic
> > extension that chnages a job's owner and make it generally available.
> >
> > For something like this to be included in the OS itself, it should be done
> > only after making sure that there will be no unforeseen consequences....
> >
> > Or am I being too cautious and conservative?
>
> A healthy attitude to take in your "job" as Registrar, I think.

yes, but it also takes some of the fun out...

> If the problem is relatively unique, the simplest solution might be to
> produce (or ask someone else to do it for you, Arnould) a new, ad hoc,
> keyword to EXECute jobs that allows you to specify the owner.

Or even simpler, the  EX_M described earlier. All things told, that should be a four 
lines
addition to a total of 2 source files (one line being the new name....).


> A more elaborate solution to solve the problem in a general way might be to
> extend the functionality of the existing suit of keywords, ie EX, EW, ET,
> etc. The parameter options for these keywords are already overly
> complex so its not ideal, but I think it could be done relatively easily:
> Wherever the ;<parameter string> option is allowed in the parameter list
> there could equally well be \<owner job ID> and/or !<priority> instead or in
> addition, in any order, ie:
>
>     EX [ #channel TO ] prog_spec [ TO prog_spec ] * [ TO #channel ]
>
> where prog_spec is
>
>     program [, filename | #channel ] * [ [ ; parameter string] [ \ owner ]
> [ ! priority ]  ]
>
> Better than producing a new keyword (with or without degrading the existing
> nomenclature eh, Wolfgang ;)

(grin)

Err - no?

I've already trouble to understand the normal EX command line options.

I've checked with Fran�ois van Emelen, EX_M is used nowhere and would thus be a 
perfect fit.
I'll probably go for that!

Wolfgang



----------------------------------------
www.scp-paulet-lenerz.com

_______________________________________________
QL-Users Mailing List

Reply via email to