Wolfgang Lenerz writes: <> > > Other thought: make the job use the thing, which in turn reserves the > > memory. On removal the thing will be informed and can deal with that. > > Just a thought, I am NO expert on things. > > But this is entirely correct - it would just mean that the thing would > have to be used continuously by that job.
Is there any reason why the job cant be born as a confirmed Thing user, ie it doesnt have to take any specific action to use the Thing when it starts up. Let the setup routine (currently EX) sort it all out before handing over to the job? Per _______________________________________________ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
