I've lost touch with Keith over the years, when he left my employers (PHS) and Uv, to move into the Unidata world. He contracted with Smiths Industries (UK), then Sony (Amsterdam), then blank! Similar story with Geoff. Last whereabouts of both were near M4 corridor between Swindon & London. Not sure whether they are still work in U2 field, but as of next month, neither will I. Probably will remain subscribed though - reminds me of success.
Regards, Ray -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 17 March 2007 08:00 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: U2 Users Digest V1 #1557 U2 Users Digest Saturday, March 17 2007 Volume 01 : Number 1557 In this issue: Re: [U2] Difference between two TIMEDATES in seconds Re: [U2] Reports In Universe BASIC RE: [U2] Reports In Universe BASIC RE: [U2] Upper Case Only RE: [U2] Upper Case Only RE: [U2] User discrepancy RE: [U2] Upper Case Only Re: [U2] Difference between two TIMEDATES in seconds RE: [U2] Reports In Universe BASIC Re: [U2] Upper Case Only RE: [U2] User discrepancy Re: [U2] Reports In Universe BASIC [U2] unsubscribe u2-users [EMAIL PROTECTED] RE: [U2] Upper Case Only [U2] Unsubscribe * RE: [U2] Upper Case Only RE: [U2] RE: [uv] 10.2 RE: [U2] RE: [uv] 10.2 Re: [U2] Upper Case Only RE: [U2] Upper Case Only Re: [U2] Upper Case Only Re: [U2] [UD] CALL @progname [U2] UO.NET version compatibility ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 13:48:40 +0000 (GMT) From: Marco Manyevere <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [U2] Difference between two TIMEDATES in seconds Thanks its the last formula that I was actually failing to visualise. I thought it would involve some complicated algorithm. Thanks, Marco. - ----- Original Message ---- From: Perry Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Sent: Friday, 16 March, 2007 1:31:10 PM Subject: RE: [U2] Difference between two TIMEDATES in seconds Marco, BEG.TIMEDATE = TIMEDATE() END.TIMEDATE = TIMEDATE() BEG.TIME = ICONV(FIELD(BEG.TIMEDATE, ' ', 1, 1), 'MT') BEG.DATE = ICONV(FIELD(BEG.TIMEDATE, ' ', 2, 3), 'D') END.TIME = ICONV(FIELD(END.TIMEDATE, ' ', 1, 1), 'MT') END.DATE = ICONV(FIELD(END.TIMEDATE, ' ', 2, 3), 'D') ET = END.TIME - BEG.TIME + (END.DATE - BEG.DATE) * 86400 This assumes TIMEDATE() outputs in the format "hh:mm:ss dd mmm yyyy". Adjust the code if your system is configured differently. Is this what you are looking for? Perry - -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marco Manyevere Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 6:25 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: [U2] Difference between two TIMEDATES in seconds Hello everyone, Can someone help me with this. I need a way to calculate the difference between two TIMEDATE() and return the results in seconds. The biggest difference I expect between the two time dates is 100 days. Thanks and regards, Marco. ___________________________________________________________ The all-new Yahoo! Mail goes wherever you go - free your email address from your Internet provider. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. ZirMed, Inc. has strict policies regarding the content of e-mail communications, specifically Protected Health Information, any communications containing such material will be returned to the originating party with such advisement noted. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. - ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ___________________________________________________________ Inbox full of unwanted email? Get leading protection and 1GB storage with All New Yahoo! Mail. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html - ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 08:49:55 +0000 From: "Anthony W. Youngman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [U2] Reports In Universe BASIC In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kevin King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >From: MAJ Programming >>Like helping the newbies with MV, I can now add this >>little tidbit to my mental library of techniques >>should the need arise. > >Just because one can doesn't mean one should. In the case of PRINT ON >working properly without a corresponding PRINTER ON, imagine six >months later trying to find all of the programs that are outputting to >the printer. Not only do we have to search for procs and paragraphs >that start the program with a (P (or LPTR) option, but now in >searching through the BP code we have to search for both PRINTER ON >and PRINT ON. It's likely that someone will forget one of those >options (and possibly a few others I may have missed in this quick >post) and overlook a program that should have otherwise been found. But if it's your default style ALWAYS to use PRINT ON, then you won't forget it. Yes, I know there's loads of old code ... But using PRINT ON is sometimes necessary (printing several reports from one pass of the data), and prevents errors with PRINTER ON. Oh - and if you're going to go down your route, I'd enforce a style that said "PRINT always prints to the printer, if you want the terminal, use CRT". That was the style used by a colleague of mine. So we had a real mix :-) Old stuff with PRINTER ON, my colleague using CRT for the terminal, and me using PRINT ON. I take your point, but these techniques are useful. Cheers, Wol - -- Anthony W. Youngman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 'Yings, yow graley yin! Suz ae rikt dheu,' said the blue man, taking the thimble. 'What *is* he?' said Magrat. 'They're gnomes,' said Nanny. The man lowered the thimble. 'Pictsies!' Carpe Jugulum, Terry Pratchett 1998 Visit the MaVerick web-site - <http://www.maverick-dbms.org> Open Source Pick ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 11:15:38 -0500 From: "Brutzman, Bill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [U2] Reports In Universe BASIC True... but there is no hypocrisy in the "Clap On... Clap Off...The Clapper". - --Bill - -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kevin King Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 10:22 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: RE: [U2] Reports In Universe BASIC I don't have a problem with PRINT ON, I simply think that if you're printing to the printer, at least say PRINTER ON so it's obvious. We need the hippocratic oath for this industry. http://www.hal-pc.org/~ollie/hippocratic.oath.html - -Kevin [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.PrecisOnline.com ** Check out scheduled Connect! training courses at http://www.PrecisOnline.com/train.html. - ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 09:30:52 -0400 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [U2] Upper Case Only Isn't that really more of a data issue though, rather than a programming issue? I absolutely believe that data should be stored in U/L case, but that doesn't affect the programming at all. For searching on this data, we just use dictionaries that put it in all upper case - very easy to search on. - -Dianne Quoting Laura Hirsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I think that the upper/lower case issue -- albeit not a show stopper for > anyone - is "much worse than that". > > Besides the "internal" back-n-forth about programming in basic, and what > case should be "current", I think that a bigger issue revolves around data > presentation and converting to a "modern" display and "modern" usage. > > For example, reports, mailing labels, "Dear John" letters... I mean, as a > programmer, I can use MCU - that works great, MCL - not as useful, but, > still works as documented. MCT? It's embarrassing. Dr. Mark Jones, MD is > almost impossible to return. Mark Jones III - allows me to send a "state of > the art" letter addressed to "Mark Jones Iii". > > SEARCH is another of my pet peeves. It should be *smart enough* to figure > out, or at least provide an option to be case insensitive. Maybe it does, > and I'm not aware. But it just always seemed crazy. So, I search - string? > "MARK JONES" then "Mark Jones" then "Mark jones" then "mark jones". > > BTREES? Although some may disagree, Mark Jones and MARK JONES are the same > thing - at least in our business environment. > > I think that if we want to work in a world that doesn't shout at us all the > time, then we need to look beyond how to write a basic program > > That's my $.02 (hey, what happened to the "cent" character... it used to be > there... I know it was... oh, maybe that was on the typewriters that didn't > allow lower case) > > Laura > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mats Carlid > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 6:23 AM > To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > Subject: Re: [U2] Upper Case Only > > One reason for why the upper case only thing started that has been mentioned > in this thread is that some early terminals didn't have lower case. > > This is indeed true but it used to be much worse than that ! > > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.11/723 - Release Date: 3/15/2007 > 11:27 AM > ------- > u2-users mailing list > u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2007 12:53:12 +1100 From: "Ross Ferris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [U2] Upper Case Only I have to agree with this. One of the things that Raining Data have done right (IMHO) is to provide case insensitivity, right down to the file level ... if you want SMITH = smith you can, if SMITH # smith you can set a file up for that as well Ross Ferris Stamina Software Visage > Better by Design! >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-u2- >[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Laura Hirsh >Sent: Saturday, 17 March 2007 12:15 AM >To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org >Subject: RE: [U2] Upper Case Only > >I think that the upper/lower case issue -- albeit not a show stopper for >anyone - is "much worse than that". > >Besides the "internal" back-n-forth about programming in basic, and what >case should be "current", I think that a bigger issue revolves around >data >presentation and converting to a "modern" display and "modern" usage. > >For example, reports, mailing labels, "Dear John" letters... I mean, as >a >programmer, I can use MCU - that works great, MCL - not as useful, but, >still works as documented. MCT? It's embarrassing. Dr. Mark Jones, MD is >almost impossible to return. Mark Jones III - allows me to send a "state >of >the art" letter addressed to "Mark Jones Iii". > >SEARCH is another of my pet peeves. It should be *smart enough* to >figure >out, or at least provide an option to be case insensitive. Maybe it >does, >and I'm not aware. But it just always seemed crazy. So, I search - >string? >"MARK JONES" then "Mark Jones" then "Mark jones" then "mark jones". > >BTREES? Although some may disagree, Mark Jones and MARK JONES are the >same >thing - at least in our business environment. > >I think that if we want to work in a world that doesn't shout at us all >the >time, then we need to look beyond how to write a basic program > >That's my $.02 (hey, what happened to the "cent" character... it used to >be >there... I know it was... oh, maybe that was on the typewriters that >didn't >allow lower case) > >Laura > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mats Carlid >Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 6:23 AM >To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org >Subject: Re: [U2] Upper Case Only > >One reason for why the upper case only thing started that has been >mentioned >in this thread is that some early terminals didn't have lower case. > >This is indeed true but it used to be much worse than that ! > > >-- >No virus found in this outgoing message. >Checked by AVG Free Edition. >Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.11/723 - Release Date: >3/15/2007 >11:27 AM >------- >u2-users mailing list >u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org >To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 23:56:43 -0000 From: "John Jenkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [U2] User discrepancy While I remember - there *was* a problem with IP addresses being reversed for some client connections - this caused (as you noted) the device licensing pool to be incorrectly distributed between mixed session types (telnet vs ODBC vs UO etc) - each having an unique and separate pool. So one client with both a TELNET and an ODBC session (for example) to the same server would consume 1 license seat in each of two separate DL pools (not ideal). This is wholly fixed I believe - you may have hit on a new wrinkle though. Are you saying that if you open a socket connection from a (license consuming) UO.NET session which is part of a device license pool it consumes a license *outside* the pool when it is not connecting to the same U2 database? (Remembering it is the client IP and MAC that determines what is - and is not - part of a shared pool). If I have misunderstood this one could you clarify please and the database and client software versions? Regards JayJay - -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Leach Sent: 14 March 2007 23:08 To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: RE: [U2] User discrepancy Hi First, to clear the excess licences you can run the following from a CMD prompt: uvlictool clean_lic -a This should check against actual processes and reset the count correctly. I found problems with device licencing and versions of UO.NET - this incorrectly reported the wrong client IP address and took an extra licence. Also the iPhantom hit me - any program or subroutine called through a UO session that opened a socket was incorrectly being considered a phantom and so took an extra iPhantom licence. And there's always the old issue of people closing terminal emulator windows without logging off. Brian > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Waldron > Sent: 14 March 2007 22:05 > To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > Subject: [U2] User discrepancy > > I have an issue with users on my system. Running Win2003/Intel and UV > 10.2 > When I do a USERS I get 78 users logged on the system When I > do a PORT.STATUS it says 18 uniVerse sessions; 17 > interactive, 1 phantom When I look at UniAdmin/Users I get > the same 17 Users and 1 Background > > At times I'm getting Users exceed limit which tells me > processes are not being terminated properly. Also I have been > having trouble with record locks since the upgrade to 10.2. > New server hardware and OS (Win=2003) was cloned from the old > server (Win2000) then the upgrade to 10.2 occurred. This may > be some of the issue but that's the way my network guy likes > to build servers. We have a lot of local users and this > doesn't require us to rekey everyone. > Any thoughts on maybe a file or something that I might be > corrupt that I could fix? > Thanks in advance, > > Mark Waldron > Director of Information Systems > City of Salem, Va > ------- > u2-users mailing list > u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ - ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ - ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 16:27:56 -0700 From: Stewart Leicester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [U2] Upper Case Only SEARCH was designed to be fast and, at the time, it was much faster to scan for the first character of the searched-for string and, if you found it, execute a string compare instruction. It was also a much simpler algorithm. I later wrote a case-insensitive version but it either never made it into the released code or just never got documented. I think it's funny that, even though an obvious enhancement, none of the coders who re-implemented the original Reality function added a case-insensitive option. Stewart - -----Original Message----- From: "Laura Hirsh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 09:15:20 -0400 SEARCH is another of my pet peeves. It should be *smart enough* to figure out, or at least provide an option to be case insensitive. Maybe it does, and I'm not aware. But it just always seemed crazy. So, I search - string? "MARK JONES" then "Mark Jones" then "Mark jones" then "mark jones". Laura - -- Stewart Leicester | JenSoft Technologies, LLC "Per Ardua Ad Astra" | <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2006 12:14:25 +0100 From: "Manu Fernandes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [U2] Difference between two TIMEDATES in seconds re, a little expression * 11:31:41 16 Mar 2007 timedate() sample * A = TIMEDATE() 1 * B = TIMEDATE() 2 *----------------- BD = (ICONV(OCONV(A,'G1 3'),'D') * 86400) ED = (ICONV(OCONV(B,'G1 3'),'D') * 86400) BT = ICONV(OCONV(A,'G0:3'),'MTS') ET = ICONV(OCONV(B,'G0:3'),'MTS') DIFF = (ED - BD ) + (ET - BT) you can do it with a IType I hope this help... Manu - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marco Manyevere" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 11:24 AM Subject: [U2] Difference between two TIMEDATES in seconds > Hello everyone, > > Can someone help me with this. I need a way to calculate the difference > between two TIMEDATE() and return the results in seconds. The biggest > difference I expect between the two time dates is 100 days. > > Thanks and regards, Marco. > > > > ___________________________________________________________ > The all-new Yahoo! Mail goes wherever you go - free your email address > from your Internet provider. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html > ------- > u2-users mailing list > u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 08:21:30 -0600 From: "Kevin King" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [U2] Reports In Universe BASIC I don't have a problem with PRINT ON, I simply think that if you're printing to the printer, at least say PRINTER ON so it's obvious. We need the hippocratic oath for this industry. http://www.hal-pc.org/~ollie/hippocratic.oath.html - -Kevin [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.PrecisOnline.com ** Check out scheduled Connect! training courses at http://www.PrecisOnline.com/train.html. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 08:24:52 -0600 From: Jeff Schasny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [U2] Upper Case Only Different subject all together. I don't think anyone would disagree that there is a need to store (some) data in upper/lower case. The ongoing discussion has been about program source code, the 'consumer' of which is the machine itself who really doesn't give a hoot one way or another. Oh, and just because its Friday and therefore I'm in a particularly jovial mood has anyone anyone considered during this crusade that no matter how you write your source code it compiles to psudocode that is ALL UPPER CASE!!! :) Laura Hirsh wrote: > I think that the upper/lower case issue -- albeit not a show stopper for > anyone - is "much worse than that". > > Besides the "internal" back-n-forth about programming in basic, and what > case should be "current", I think that a bigger issue revolves around data > presentation and converting to a "modern" display and "modern" usage. > > For example, reports, mailing labels, "Dear John" letters... I mean, as a > programmer, I can use MCU - that works great, MCL - not as useful, but, > still works as documented. MCT? It's embarrassing. Dr. Mark Jones, MD is > almost impossible to return. Mark Jones III - allows me to send a "state of > the art" letter addressed to "Mark Jones Iii". > > SEARCH is another of my pet peeves. It should be *smart enough* to figure > out, or at least provide an option to be case insensitive. Maybe it does, > and I'm not aware. But it just always seemed crazy. So, I search - string? > "MARK JONES" then "Mark Jones" then "Mark jones" then "mark jones". > > BTREES? Although some may disagree, Mark Jones and MARK JONES are the same > thing - at least in our business environment. > > I think that if we want to work in a world that doesn't shout at us all the > time, then we need to look beyond how to write a basic program > > That's my $.02 (hey, what happened to the "cent" character... it used to be > there... I know it was... oh, maybe that was on the typewriters that didn't > allow lower case) > > Laura ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 20:53:44 -0000 From: "John Jenkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [U2] User discrepancy Brian Any PHANTOM that opens a Socket is a license consumer - it's not a bug, it was intentional (see iPHANTOMS). Regards JayJay - -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Leach Sent: 14 March 2007 23:08 To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: RE: [U2] User discrepancy Hi First, to clear the excess licences you can run the following from a CMD prompt: uvlictool clean_lic -a This should check against actual processes and reset the count correctly. I found problems with device licencing and versions of UO.NET - this incorrectly reported the wrong client IP address and took an extra licence. Also the iPhantom hit me - any program or subroutine called through a UO session that opened a socket was incorrectly being considered a phantom and so took an extra iPhantom licence. And there's always the old issue of people closing terminal emulator windows without logging off. Brian > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Waldron > Sent: 14 March 2007 22:05 > To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > Subject: [U2] User discrepancy > > I have an issue with users on my system. Running Win2003/Intel and UV > 10.2 > When I do a USERS I get 78 users logged on the system When I > do a PORT.STATUS it says 18 uniVerse sessions; 17 > interactive, 1 phantom When I look at UniAdmin/Users I get > the same 17 Users and 1 Background > > At times I'm getting Users exceed limit which tells me > processes are not being terminated properly. Also I have been > having trouble with record locks since the upgrade to 10.2. > New server hardware and OS (Win=2003) was cloned from the old > server (Win2000) then the upgrade to 10.2 occurred. This may > be some of the issue but that's the way my network guy likes > to build servers. We have a lot of local users and this > doesn't require us to rekey everyone. > Any thoughts on maybe a file or something that I might be > corrupt that I could fix? > Thanks in advance, > > Mark Waldron > Director of Information Systems > City of Salem, Va > ------- > u2-users mailing list > u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ - ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 08:53:27 +0000 From: "Anthony W. Youngman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [U2] Reports In Universe BASIC In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, MAJ Programming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >I will stand on my soapbox and shout that MV has no standards, just a lot of >styles. There is no governing body to enforce standards and if the remaining >providers (u2/uv/ d3 etc) were to build and force them, there would be some >disagreements at that level. If they concurred, then all of the existing >code underneath would have to be magically re-written or allowed to remain. >How coult anyone really prove that their 'style' should be the 'standard'. >Are we going to have a standards convention and hash over each MV topic from >loops, gotos, opens, dict items, procs, PRINT ON blah, blah. And I'll stand on my soapbox and say that one of the MAJOR ADVANTAGES of Pick is that it doesn't enforce standards. That's part of my complaint about RDBMSs - using them is a hell of a lot of work because if your data doesn't fit the standard (as it usually doesn't) then you have to force the real world into the straightjacket provided by the standard, rather than relax the straightjacket to fit the data. Basically, you're forced to act like a scientist throwing away the data that doesn't fit the theory instead of what a scientist is supposed to do - mould the theory to fit the data. Cheers, Wol - -- Anthony W. Youngman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 'Yings, yow graley yin! Suz ae rikt dheu,' said the blue man, taking the thimble. 'What *is* he?' said Magrat. 'They're gnomes,' said Nanny. The man lowered the thimble. 'Pictsies!' Carpe Jugulum, Terry Pratchett 1998 Visit the MaVerick web-site - <http://www.maverick-dbms.org> Open Source Pick ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 14:58:08 +0500 From: "Jawed Akhtar - ISTD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [U2] unsubscribe u2-users [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 09:15:20 -0400 From: "Laura Hirsh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [U2] Upper Case Only I think that the upper/lower case issue -- albeit not a show stopper for anyone - is "much worse than that". Besides the "internal" back-n-forth about programming in basic, and what case should be "current", I think that a bigger issue revolves around data presentation and converting to a "modern" display and "modern" usage. For example, reports, mailing labels, "Dear John" letters... I mean, as a programmer, I can use MCU - that works great, MCL - not as useful, but, still works as documented. MCT? It's embarrassing. Dr. Mark Jones, MD is almost impossible to return. Mark Jones III - allows me to send a "state of the art" letter addressed to "Mark Jones Iii". SEARCH is another of my pet peeves. It should be *smart enough* to figure out, or at least provide an option to be case insensitive. Maybe it does, and I'm not aware. But it just always seemed crazy. So, I search - string? "MARK JONES" then "Mark Jones" then "Mark jones" then "mark jones". BTREES? Although some may disagree, Mark Jones and MARK JONES are the same thing - at least in our business environment. I think that if we want to work in a world that doesn't shout at us all the time, then we need to look beyond how to write a basic program That's my $.02 (hey, what happened to the "cent" character... it used to be there... I know it was... oh, maybe that was on the typewriters that didn't allow lower case) Laura - -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mats Carlid Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 6:23 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] Upper Case Only One reason for why the upper case only thing started that has been mentioned in this thread is that some early terminals didn't have lower case. This is indeed true but it used to be much worse than that ! - -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.11/723 - Release Date: 3/15/2007 11:27 AM ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 16:06:03 +0500 From: "Jawed Akhtar - ISTD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [U2] Unsubscribe * - -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marco Manyevere Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 3:25 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: [U2] Difference between two TIMEDATES in seconds Hello everyone, Can someone help me with this. I need a way to calculate the difference between two TIMEDATE() and return the results in seconds. The biggest difference I expect between the two time dates is 100 days. Thanks and regards, Marco. ___________________________________________________________ The all-new Yahoo! Mail goes wherever you go - free your email address from your Internet provider. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html - ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 10:32:16 -0400 From: "Laura Hirsh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [U2] Upper Case Only Thanks Diane. It is a data issue... but also a programming challenge as well. It sounds like your environment has had standards in place that make it easy to live in the "Upper/lower case world", but this isn't the case with many applications, nor with a lot of legacy software and/or data. And it's really a challenge to implement this type of standard "mid-stream". As for the searching I was talking about, it was using the verb SEARCH - where you search across an entire file - not just attributes - so, although the dictionaries are great for one field searching - that's a different animal. On the same note, anyone gotten "yelled at" from a blackberry lately? On these "hand-held" units, (phones, etc), living in the "upper/lower case world" is, well, not really practical. And I get emails - in all upper case - - from these devices all the time. But, boy, the possibilities of being able to take these devices into use as "remote data entry" devices are really intriguing - aren't they? Laura - -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 9:31 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: RE: [U2] Upper Case Only Isn't that really more of a data issue though, rather than a programming issue? I absolutely believe that data should be stored in U/L case, but that doesn't affect the programming at all. For searching on this data, we just use dictionaries that put it in all upper case - very easy to search on. - -Dianne Quoting Laura Hirsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I think that the upper/lower case issue -- albeit not a show stopper for > anyone - is "much worse than that". > > Besides the "internal" back-n-forth about programming in basic, and what > case should be "current", I think that a bigger issue revolves around data > presentation and converting to a "modern" display and "modern" usage. > > For example, reports, mailing labels, "Dear John" letters... I mean, as a > programmer, I can use MCU - that works great, MCL - not as useful, but, > still works as documented. MCT? It's embarrassing. Dr. Mark Jones, MD is > almost impossible to return. Mark Jones III - allows me to send a "state of > the art" letter addressed to "Mark Jones Iii". > > SEARCH is another of my pet peeves. It should be *smart enough* to figure > out, or at least provide an option to be case insensitive. Maybe it does, > and I'm not aware. But it just always seemed crazy. So, I search - string? > "MARK JONES" then "Mark Jones" then "Mark jones" then "mark jones". > > BTREES? Although some may disagree, Mark Jones and MARK JONES are the same > thing - at least in our business environment. > > I think that if we want to work in a world that doesn't shout at us all the > time, then we need to look beyond how to write a basic program > > That's my $.02 (hey, what happened to the "cent" character... it used to be > there... I know it was... oh, maybe that was on the typewriters that didn't > allow lower case) > > Laura > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mats Carlid > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 6:23 AM > To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > Subject: Re: [U2] Upper Case Only > > One reason for why the upper case only thing started that has been mentioned > in this thread is that some early terminals didn't have lower case. > > This is indeed true but it used to be much worse than that ! > > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.11/723 - Release Date: 3/15/2007 > 11:27 AM > ------- > u2-users mailing list > u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ - -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.11/723 - Release Date: 3/15/2007 11:27 AM - -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.11/723 - Release Date: 3/15/2007 11:27 AM - ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 18:53:58 -0700 From: "Mark Eastwood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [U2] RE: [uv] 10.2 Thanks for the info. - -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Dallaire Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 11:22 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: RE: [U2] RE: [uv] 10.2 We are running UV 10.2 in house with SB+ and SB Client 5.3.4. We have found 3 issues thus far and IBM is working on all of them at this time. 1. When exiting out of an SBClient session by clicking on the "X" in the upper right corner the session will close, but the UniVerse Port is left "logged in." IBM informed us there is also an issue with group locks, see excerpt below. It has come to light that there was a problem introduced in UniVerse 10.2 where if the "QUIT" or "OFF" verbs were being used, an application Error evernt was created and group locks were being left active. Do you recall if your customer appeared to be experiencing active group locks? IBM is shooting for a tentative fix date sometime this month for this issue. 2. When using callHTTP with a client side certificate the POST will return an error because of changes in the new openssl being used. 3. The BASIC command WRITEU no longer retains the lock on the record after the write occurs. We did some testing with 10.1.18 and could not duplicate any of the above issues. We did have a customer running UV 10.2 but backed them down to 10.1.18 and everything appears to running correctly. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 10:27:56 -0700 From: "IT-Laure Hansen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [U2] RE: [uv] 10.2 We're running it on a test & dev server and so far are fine - nothing to report. OS is Win2003 server. I'm also curious to read anything about this before we go live. Laure Hansen, City of Redwood City Information Technology www.redwoodcity.org 1017 Middlefield Road Redwood City, CA 94063 Tel: 650-780-7087 Fax: 650-556-9204 [EMAIL PROTECTED] - -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Eastwood Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 8:23 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: [U2] RE: [uv] 10.2 Speaking of UV 10.2 - anyone running it care to share their experience. I've heard rumors of a "locking" issue, but don't know the details. Mark - -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-u2- Subject: Re: [U2] Upper Case Only I missed the start of this thread so appologies if this has been said before.... UV 10.2 introduces a CASE command to turn on / off case sensitivity. Unfortunately, as far as I can see, they don't appear to have documented it (along with quite a lot of other new stuff). - ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 10:36:22 -0400 From: Charles Barouch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [U2] Upper Case Only Diane, Dictionaries to change case are great if you are searching on a specific field. I think Laura's issue relates to searching the entire text of a record. - Chuck "Putting Words In Laura's Mouth Even Though She Can Speak For Herself Since 2004" Barouch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Isn't that really more of a data issue though, rather than a programming issue? > I absolutely believe that data should be stored in U/L case, but that doesn't > affect the programming at all. For searching on this data, we just use > dictionaries that put it in all upper case - very easy to search on. > -Dianne > > > Quoting Laura Hirsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > >> I think that the upper/lower case issue -- albeit not a show stopper for >> anyone - is "much worse than that". >> >> Besides the "internal" back-n-forth about programming in basic, and what >> case should be "current", I think that a bigger issue revolves around data >> presentation and converting to a "modern" display and "modern" usage. >> >> For example, reports, mailing labels, "Dear John" letters... I mean, as a >> programmer, I can use MCU - that works great, MCL - not as useful, but, >> still works as documented. MCT? It's embarrassing. Dr. Mark Jones, MD is >> almost impossible to return. Mark Jones III - allows me to send a "state of >> the art" letter addressed to "Mark Jones Iii". >> >> SEARCH is another of my pet peeves. It should be *smart enough* to figure >> out, or at least provide an option to be case insensitive. Maybe it does, >> and I'm not aware. But it just always seemed crazy. So, I search - string? >> "MARK JONES" then "Mark Jones" then "Mark jones" then "mark jones". >> >> BTREES? Although some may disagree, Mark Jones and MARK JONES are the same >> thing - at least in our business environment. >> >> I think that if we want to work in a world that doesn't shout at us all the >> time, then we need to look beyond how to write a basic program >> >> That's my $.02 (hey, what happened to the "cent" character... it used to be >> there... I know it was... oh, maybe that was on the typewriters that didn't >> allow lower case) >> >> Laura >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mats Carlid >> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 6:23 AM >> To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org >> Subject: Re: [U2] Upper Case Only >> >> One reason for why the upper case only thing started that has been mentioned >> in this thread is that some early terminals didn't have lower case. >> >> This is indeed true but it used to be much worse than that ! >> >> >> -- >> No virus found in this outgoing message. >> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.11/723 - Release Date: 3/15/2007 >> 11:27 AM >> ------- >> u2-users mailing list >> u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org >> To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ >> > ------- > u2-users mailing list > u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ > > - -- Charles Barouch ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) www.KeyAlly.com (718) 762-3884 x 1 P. O. Box 540957, Queens, NY 11354 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 20:10:29 -0700 From: "Bill H" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [U2] Upper Case Only Jeff: This thread is about __MORE__ than just the data! Kevin eloquently pointed out that some of the "old ways" in the U2 space need to be abandoned for more modern thinking. A certain perspective has survived here for years and this has spilled over into a number of areas where the U2 products have lagged behind in development. This seems to be changing, both with IBM's commitment and with this space's more recent thinking. The current state of affairs in U2 is case-sensitivity. This construct manifests itself negatively in myriad ways; data storage, command execution, indexing, searching, code production, etc, etc, etc. The current "work-arounds" only address one aspect or another of the problem; e.g. with an environment setting one can compile BASIC code in a case-insensitive mode (great - . What about the other negative aspects of case-sensitivity? There might be another "work-around" but the solution has not been engineered, and needs to be. Some may want to code in upper-case only. As far as I can see there's nothing wrong with this. But be reasonable; don't __FORCE__ me to do the same !! Most of this thread has addressed the inconvenience of forced-casing or the "it shouldn't bother anyone, get used to it" perspective. MV was designed to be a dynamic product; not constrained by the arbitrary constraints of other dbms products; which offers tremendous flexibility. But it's hard to describe the difficulties involved in manipulating strings at the application level for simple string searches. These difficulties become larger and larger with each technology one interfaces with (like the web). The solution is simple...give both U2 products the ability, at least to start with, to install as a case-insensitive product; granularity can be added. Bill - -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Schasny Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 7:25 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] Upper Case Only Different subject all together. I don't think anyone would disagree that there is a need to store (some) data in upper/lower case. The ongoing discussion has been about program source code, the 'consumer' of which is the machine itself who really doesn't give a hoot one way or another. Oh, and just because its Friday and therefore I'm in a particularly jovial mood has anyone anyone considered during this crusade that no matter how you write your source code it compiles to psudocode that is ALL UPPER CASE!!! :) Laura Hirsh wrote: > I think that the upper/lower case issue -- albeit not a show stopper for > anyone - is "much worse than that". > > Besides the "internal" back-n-forth about programming in basic, and what > case should be "current", I think that a bigger issue revolves around data > presentation and converting to a "modern" display and "modern" usage. > > For example, reports, mailing labels, "Dear John" letters... I mean, as a > programmer, I can use MCU - that works great, MCL - not as useful, but, > still works as documented. MCT? It's embarrassing. Dr. Mark Jones, MD is > almost impossible to return. Mark Jones III - allows me to send a "state of > the art" letter addressed to "Mark Jones Iii". > > SEARCH is another of my pet peeves. It should be *smart enough* to figure > out, or at least provide an option to be case insensitive. Maybe it does, > and I'm not aware. But it just always seemed crazy. So, I search - string? > "MARK JONES" then "Mark Jones" then "Mark jones" then "mark jones". > > BTREES? Although some may disagree, Mark Jones and MARK JONES are the same > thing - at least in our business environment. > > I think that if we want to work in a world that doesn't shout at us all the > time, then we need to look beyond how to write a basic program > > That's my $.02 (hey, what happened to the "cent" character... it used to be > there... I know it was... oh, maybe that was on the typewriters that didn't > allow lower case) > > Laura - ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 11:23:13 +0100 From: "Mats Carlid" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [U2] Upper Case Only One reason for why the upper case only thing started that has been mentioned in this thread is that some early terminals didn't have lower case. This is indeed true but it used to be much worse than that ! The early days computers themselves didn't handle lowercase as they had 6bit characters allowing for a 64 character alphabet only. I've only used two such machines the IBM 7044 and CDC 6600 but before the IBM360 arrived in the mid 60's it was the general rule for mainframes to have 6bit chars. ( There were exceptions. IIRC british Orion and swedish Facit and Saab had 8bit bytes, and the minis. ) - -- mats ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 13:15:16 +0100 From: "Mats Carlid" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [U2] [UD] CALL @progname The 'extra' time when calling as a function is likely due to the assignment of the result to a variable. Doing that a million times has to trigger a significant number of garbage collects. Perhaps You could modify the test to call the routine and 'copy' the result argument to a variable - it should IMHO result in a time about the same as the function call... - -- mats David Wolverton skrev: > Actually - I just ran a test, and was surprised somewhat: > > 1,000,000 Iterations of ways to do a call... > > CALL PROGNAME (direct) 7047 > CALL *PROGNAME (global) 7766 > CALL @PROGNAME (indirect) 6984 > GOSUB (logic contained in-line) 1531 > Call as Function 10203 > > I've rearranged the order the routines are called in, and run the test suite > over and over... The Indirect calls are CLEARLY faster, with all numbers > moving +/- 50, EXCEPT the indirect, which only moved +/- 25 or so. > > Note that I set the @PROGNAME outside of the "call" loop - this was not > testing how fast the system could set variables - just the difference on the > 'calls'. If I include the setting of the name WITHIN the loop, the indirect > call went to 7290 or so -- the difference in the 'direct' call vs the > 'indirect' call efficiency appears to be in the Variable handling! But both > are still faster than use of Global catalogs. > > Anyone have a clue why the indirects are a hair faster? Or am I just getting > lucky over and over? I always thought they were slower as well! > > DW ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 20:26:34 -0700 From: "Tony Gravagno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [U2] UO.NET version compatibility I have a project that was built with UO.NET v2.1.0.7149. I have an end-user with UO.NET v2.1.1.7211. The UniSDK does not automatically register the UODOTNET.DLL assembly into the GAC. I manually registered it with gacutil but the main project still does not find it - which leads me to ask: Are these releases binary-compatible, or do we need to rebuild the main project with the v2.1.1 in order for it to work on the client's systems? Thanks! Tony Gravagno Nebula Research and Development TG@ removethisNebula-RnD.com Specializing in web development, web services, and other advanced connectivity from MV to "anything" using .NET and other technologies. ------------------------------ End of U2 Users Digest V1 #1557 ******************************* ------------ u2-users-digest mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
