Re: [U2] U2 on Windows 2012 Server

[Wally Terhune]

We added W2012 to the Windows certification platform list for UniData 7.3.3. 
This is currently targeted for the end of January. As we have not yet reached 
code freeze for this patch, we have not started the QA process - so don't know 
how well this will go (the W2012 testing).

I don't know of any customers trying this, but there are lots of things 
customers do and don't call support about...


Wally Terhune
Technical Support Engineer
Rocket Software
4600 South Ulster Street, Suite 1100 **Denver, CO 80237 **USA
t: +1 720 475 8055 **e: wterh...@rocketsoftware.com **w: u2.rocketsoftware.com


-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org 
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Bill Haskett
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 6:02 PM
To: U2 Mail List
Subject: [U2] U2 on Windows 2012 Server

Does the U2 product(s) run on Windows 2012 Server?  Microsoft has pulled 
2008 R2 from my MSDN download site and gives me 2012 instead.

Thanks,

Bill
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

[U2] U2 on Windows 2012 Server

[Bill Haskett]

Does the U2 product(s) run on Windows 2012 Server?  Microsoft has pulled 
2008 R2 from my MSDN download site and gives me 2012 instead.


Thanks,

Bill
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] Advantage of indirect call in BASIC

[Wjhonson]

Why do you call it "ring" jump in particular?
What's the "ring" ?

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Wols Lists 
To: u2-users 
Sent: Tue, Dec 4, 2012 4:07 pm
Subject: Re: [U2] Advantage of indirect call in BASIC


On 04/12/12 17:03, Wjhonson wrote:
> Ring-jump ?
> Vas is das
> 
It's when the processor jumps between restricted user mode, and kernel
can do anything mode.

Cheers,
Wol
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

 
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] Advantage of indirect call in BASIC

[Wols Lists]

On 04/12/12 17:03, Wjhonson wrote:
> Ring-jump ?
> Vas is das
> 
It's when the processor jumps between restricted user mode, and kernel
can do anything mode.

Cheers,
Wol
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] U2 Toolkit for .NET and Windows PowerShell - how?

[rajank]

Please visit the above link (stackoverflow).
There is an answer (*ADO.NET *way and *UO.NET *way). See screen shot and
PowerShell script.
If you have more question, you can ask U2 Support Team.



--
View this message in context: 
http://u2-universe-unidata.1073795.n5.nabble.com/U2-Toolkit-for-NET-and-Windows-PowerShell-how-tp39376p39378.html
Sent from the U2 - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] U2 Toolkit for .NET and Windows PowerShell - how?

[Kate Stanton]

Maybe you should let us all know when you have found the answers.

On 5 December 2012 07:03, rajank  wrote:

> Please read :
>
> *
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13347631/using-the-u2-toolkit-for-net-uniobjects-in-windows-powershell*
>
>
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13347631/using-the-u2-toolkit-for-net-uniobjects-in-windows-powershell
> <
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13347631/using-the-u2-toolkit-for-net-uniobjects-in-windows-powershell
> >
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://u2-universe-unidata.1073795.n5.nabble.com/U2-Toolkit-for-NET-and-Windows-PowerShell-how-tp39376.html
> Sent from the U2 - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> ___
> U2-Users mailing list
> U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
> http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
>



-- 
Kate Stanton
Walstan Systems Ltd
4 Kelmarna Ave, Herne Bay, Auckland 1011, New Zealand
Phone: + 64 9 360 5310  Mobile: + 64 21 400 486
Email: k...@walstan.com
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

[U2] U2 Toolkit for .NET and Windows PowerShell - how?

[rajank]

Please read :

*http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13347631/using-the-u2-toolkit-for-net-uniobjects-in-windows-powershell*

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13347631/using-the-u2-toolkit-for-net-uniobjects-in-windows-powershell

  



--
View this message in context: 
http://u2-universe-unidata.1073795.n5.nabble.com/U2-Toolkit-for-NET-and-Windows-PowerShell-how-tp39376.html
Sent from the U2 - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] How can I create DataSet using U2 Toolkit for .NET's Add-ins and Visual Studio 2010 DataSet Designer?

[Brian Leach]

Hi Rajan

Good job!

Brian


-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of rajank
Sent: 04 December 2012 17:17
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: [U2] How can I create DataSet using U2 Toolkit for .NET's Add-ins
and Visual Studio 2010 DataSet Designer?

Please read :

*http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13666214/how-can-i-create-dataset-using-
u2-toolkit-for-nets-add-ins-and-visual-studio-2*


http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13666214/how-can-i-create-dataset-using-u
2-toolkit-for-nets-add-ins-and-visual-studio-2
  



--
View this message in context:
http://u2-universe-unidata.1073795.n5.nabble.com/How-can-I-create-DataSet-us
ing-U2-Toolkit-for-NET-s-Add-ins-and-Visual-Studio-2010-DataSet-Designer-tp3
9373.html
Sent from the U2 - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

[U2] How can I create Entity Data Model using U2 Toolkit for .NET’s Add-ins and Visual Studio 2010 Entity Data Model Designer?

[rajank]

Please read :

*http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13677440/u2-database-add-ins-for-visual-studio-and-entity-data-model*


http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13677440/u2-database-add-ins-for-visual-studio-and-entity-data-model

  



--
View this message in context: 
http://u2-universe-unidata.1073795.n5.nabble.com/How-can-I-create-Entity-Data-Model-using-U2-Toolkit-for-NET-s-Add-ins-and-Visual-Studio-2010-Entity--tp39374.html
Sent from the U2 - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

[U2] How can I create DataSet using U2 Toolkit for .NET’s Add-ins and Visual Studio 2010 DataSet Designer?

[rajank]

Please read :

*http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13666214/how-can-i-create-dataset-using-u2-toolkit-for-nets-add-ins-and-visual-studio-2*


http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13666214/how-can-i-create-dataset-using-u2-toolkit-for-nets-add-ins-and-visual-studio-2

  



--
View this message in context: 
http://u2-universe-unidata.1073795.n5.nabble.com/How-can-I-create-DataSet-using-U2-Toolkit-for-NET-s-Add-ins-and-Visual-Studio-2010-DataSet-Designer-tp39373.html
Sent from the U2 - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

[U2] Product Release : U2 Database Add-ins for Visual Studio (beta)

[rajank]

We are running beta for U2NETDK's new features called "U2 Database Add-ins
for Visual Studio".
If you want to join beta, please contact U2 Support.



--
View this message in context: 
http://u2-universe-unidata.1073795.n5.nabble.com/Product-Release-U2-Database-Add-ins-for-Visual-Studio-beta-tp39372.html
Sent from the U2 - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] Advantage of indirect call in BASIC

[Wjhonson]

Ring-jump ?
Vas is das

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Wols Lists 
To: u2-users 
Sent: Tue, Dec 4, 2012 8:37 am
Subject: Re: [U2] Advantage of indirect call in BASIC


On 04/12/12 16:06, Jeff Schasny wrote:
> I'll second Allen Egerton's "left over from Prime Information" theory. I
> distinctly remember being told that indirect subroutine calls were
> measurably faster way back in my days at Prime.
> 
>From my knowledge of Pr1me architecture (which isn't great) this was one
of Pr1me's very strong points - the hardware/software subroutine call
architecture was *extremely* fast.

So much so that, clocktick for clocktick, it is probably STILL several
times faster than the now-ubiquitous x86 architecture. Shame they
haven't caught up :-(

(I'm thinking particularly here of a ring-jump, but I think it was just
blindingly fast regardless - linux goes to great efforts to avoid such
jumps, Pr1mos didn't care...)

Cheers,
Wol
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

 
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] Advantage of indirect call in BASIC

[Jeff Schasny]

Of course "blindingly fast" on a 4 MIPS 9955 is what we might now call 
"quaintly tortoise like" and that's why we still find things like the 
all indirect subroutine calls in an attempt to squeeze any available 
drop of performance out of applications.


Wols Lists wrote:

>From my knowledge of Pr1me architecture (which isn't great) this was one
of Pr1me's very strong points - the hardware/software subroutine call
architecture was *extremely* fast.

So much so that, clocktick for clocktick, it is probably STILL several
times faster than the now-ubiquitous x86 architecture. Shame they
haven't caught up :-(

(I'm thinking particularly here of a ring-jump, but I think it was just
blindingly fast regardless - linux goes to great efforts to avoid such
jumps, Pr1mos didn't care...)

Cheers,
Wol
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

  


--

Jeff Schasny - Denver, Co, USA
jschasny at gmail dot com

___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] Advantage of indirect call in BASIC

[Wols Lists]

On 04/12/12 16:06, Jeff Schasny wrote:
> I'll second Allen Egerton's "left over from Prime Information" theory. I
> distinctly remember being told that indirect subroutine calls were
> measurably faster way back in my days at Prime.
> 
>From my knowledge of Pr1me architecture (which isn't great) this was one
of Pr1me's very strong points - the hardware/software subroutine call
architecture was *extremely* fast.

So much so that, clocktick for clocktick, it is probably STILL several
times faster than the now-ubiquitous x86 architecture. Shame they
haven't caught up :-(

(I'm thinking particularly here of a ring-jump, but I think it was just
blindingly fast regardless - linux goes to great efforts to avoid such
jumps, Pr1mos didn't care...)

Cheers,
Wol
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] Advantage of indirect call in BASIC

[Jeff Schasny]

I'll second Allen Egerton's "left over from Prime Information" theory. I 
distinctly remember being told that indirect subroutine calls were 
measurably faster way back in my days at Prime.


Wjhonson wrote:

I've not encountered this is my career previously, but now I'm seeing a system 
written almost entirely with the use of indirect calls in Universe BASIC.

That is
SOURCE = "*SOME.PROGRAM"
...
CALL @SOURCE(INPUTS)

Is there some advantage to the use of indirect calls that a system would be 
written entirely in this fashion?


___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

  


--

Jeff Schasny - Denver, Co, USA
jschasny at gmail dot com

___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] Advantage of indirect call in BASIC

[Robert Houben]

We use the indirect call method to allow a user to create, for instance, an 
ITEMPROC subroutine. The subroutine implements a defined interface and the name 
is provided in the command syntax, so we parse out the subroutine name and call 
it at run-time.  There's no way at compile time that we can anticipate the 
names that a user might choose for their subroutines that implement our 
interface.

So, providing an open API is a very real case where the CALL @ syntax is 
critical.

-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org 
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Martin Phillips
Sent: December-04-12 6:13 AM
To: 'U2 Users List'
Subject: Re: [U2] Advantage of indirect call in BASIC

Hi,

A direct call has to be looked up once in the catalogue system when it is first 
used. Subsequent calls will be fast because the link has been created. However, 
if the call is itself in a subroutine and that subroutine exits, it starts 
clean again on next call and hence may need to rebuild the link. I say "may 
need to" because there are various layers of caching that speed all this up.

An indirect call starts out with a string variable. The first call will do the 
catalogue search, link the program, and replace the string with a variable that 
acts as a fast link to the subroutine. The link only needs to be rebuilt if the 
variable is overwritten or discarded. This means that putting the indirection 
variable in a common block that is only initialised once will do the catalogue 
search only once. Resetting the variable (local or common) before every call 
will require the search every time, though again caching may help.

Long ago, I did some performance comparisons on UV when delivering an Internals 
course. I have lost the results but I seem to recall that it was well worth 
using links in common for subroutines that are called enormous numbers of times.


Martin Phillips
Ladybridge Systems Ltd
17b Coldstream Lane, Hardingstone, Northampton NN4 6DB, England
+44 (0)1604-709200




-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org 
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of David A. Green
Sent: 04 December 2012 14:01
To: 'U2 Users List'
Subject: Re: [U2] Advantage of indirect call in BASIC

Does anyone have any current benchmarks on this type of call?  Several years 
ago when I tested it in UniData it was very slow call compared to using the 
name.

David A. Green
(480) 813-1725
DAG Consulting

-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Wjhonson
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2012 5:39 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: [U2] Advantage of indirect call in BASIC

I've not encountered this is my career previously, but now I'm seeing a system 
written almost entirely with the use of indirect calls in Universe BASIC.

That is
SOURCE = "*SOME.PROGRAM"
...
CALL @SOURCE(INPUTS)

Is there some advantage to the use of indirect calls that a system would be 
written entirely in this fashion?


___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] uniobjects.net

[Brett Callacher]

Similarly, you can do a SELECT  SAVING   

Then read that select list either by subroutine or directly.

The only catch is you need to make sure there is an 'A' in attribute 4 of the 
select verb.

"Kate Stanton"  wrote in message 
news:...
> Why not call a subroutine to do REFORMAT to a file, then read the file and
> return the output.  That will give you your I-type data (if I am reading
> what you are after correctly).
> 
> On 4 December 2012 03:48, Symeon Breen  wrote:
> 
> > Hi - I have been using uniobjects.net for many years now,   however I
> > usually use it to call a basic subroutine on the u2 server.  I now have a
> > little project where I need to get a number of records from a file, ideally
> > like the output of a list command as I have some itypes I also need to get.
> >
> > I could do this via a select list and read the ids into a unidataset and
> > then call other programs to get the itype data, or I could do a unixml
> > probably a few other ways.
> >
> >
> >
> > So what is the best way to do this ?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Symeon.
> >
> > ___
> > U2-Users mailing list
> > U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
> > http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Kate Stanton
> Walstan Systems Ltd
> 4 Kelmarna Ave, Herne Bay, Auckland 1011, New Zealand
> Phone: + 64 9 360 5310  Mobile: + 64 21 400 486
> Email: k...@walstan.com
> ___
> U2-Users mailing list
> U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
> http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
> 
This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is 
the property of GPM Development Ltd. It is intended only for the person to whom 
it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient ,you are not authorized 
to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or 
any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the 
sender immediately and delete all copies of this message.

This e-mail was sent to you by GPM Development Ltd.  We are incorporated under 
the laws of England and Wales (company no. 2292156 and VAT registration no. 523 
5622 63).  Our registered office is 6th Floor, AMP House, Croydon, Surrey CR0 
2LX.
 

___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] Advantage of indirect call in BASIC

[Martin Phillips]

Hi,

A direct call has to be looked up once in the catalogue system when it is first 
used. Subsequent calls will be fast because the link
has been created. However, if the call is itself in a subroutine and that 
subroutine exits, it starts clean again on next call and
hence may need to rebuild the link. I say "may need to" because there are 
various layers of caching that speed all this up.

An indirect call starts out with a string variable. The first call will do the 
catalogue search, link the program, and replace the
string with a variable that acts as a fast link to the subroutine. The link 
only needs to be rebuilt if the variable is overwritten
or discarded. This means that putting the indirection variable in a common 
block that is only initialised once will do the catalogue
search only once. Resetting the variable (local or common) before every call 
will require the search every time, though again
caching may help.

Long ago, I did some performance comparisons on UV when delivering an Internals 
course. I have lost the results but I seem to recall
that it was well worth using links in common for subroutines that are called 
enormous numbers of times.


Martin Phillips
Ladybridge Systems Ltd
17b Coldstream Lane, Hardingstone, Northampton NN4 6DB, England
+44 (0)1604-709200




-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org 
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of David A. Green
Sent: 04 December 2012 14:01
To: 'U2 Users List'
Subject: Re: [U2] Advantage of indirect call in BASIC

Does anyone have any current benchmarks on this type of call?  Several years
ago when I tested it in UniData it was very slow call compared to using the
name.

David A. Green
(480) 813-1725
DAG Consulting

-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Wjhonson
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2012 5:39 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: [U2] Advantage of indirect call in BASIC

I've not encountered this is my career previously, but now I'm seeing a
system written almost entirely with the use of indirect calls in Universe
BASIC.

That is
SOURCE = "*SOME.PROGRAM"
...
CALL @SOURCE(INPUTS)

Is there some advantage to the use of indirect calls that a system would be
written entirely in this fashion?


___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] Advantage of indirect call in BASIC

[David A. Green]

Does anyone have any current benchmarks on this type of call?  Several years
ago when I tested it in UniData it was very slow call compared to using the
name.

David A. Green
(480) 813-1725
DAG Consulting

-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Wjhonson
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2012 5:39 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: [U2] Advantage of indirect call in BASIC

I've not encountered this is my career previously, but now I'm seeing a
system written almost entirely with the use of indirect calls in Universe
BASIC.

That is
SOURCE = "*SOME.PROGRAM"
...
CALL @SOURCE(INPUTS)

Is there some advantage to the use of indirect calls that a system would be
written entirely in this fashion?


___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] Advantage of indirect call in BASIC

[Jeff Butera]

On 12/03/2012 10:11 PM, Ed Clark wrote:

I could see a 4gl writing out this kind of code, or a menu system.
When you use indirect calling, the name of the subroutine can contain odd 
characters that wouldn't normally be allowed--though on some platforms you can 
also quote the call, e.g.:
   CALL "my-sub**"(parms)



Datatel (eg: Ellucian) does this in certain places allowing their 
clients the ability to plug in custom subroutines for various things 
like GPA calculations, repeat policies, etc.





On Dec 3, 2012, at 7:38 PM, Wjhonson  wrote:


I've not encountered this is my career previously, but now I'm seeing a system 
written almost entirely with the use of indirect calls in Universe BASIC.

That is
SOURCE = "*SOME.PROGRAM"
...
CALL @SOURCE(INPUTS)

Is there some advantage to the use of indirect calls that a system would be 
written entirely in this fashion?


___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users



--
Jeff Butera, PhD
Associate Director for Applications and Web Services
Information Technology
Hampshire College
413-559-5556

___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] Advantage of indirect call in BASIC

[Manu Fernandes]

hi,

These method is very usefull when you build software like a "lego", some pieces 
are polymorphic, the assignment of "source" depens of  environment, params at 
runtime not only at compile time... the value of "soure" can be assigned from 
litteral, but also read from file or be the result of a text expression.

sample : if you run a software on mutiple plateform, unix and windows, UV, UD, 
D3, ...; to adress OS and third part software, the final syntax is different 
but the "main()" can call "source" with no difference, you an createa a new 
variation of source() with no change on the main().

sample : send a e-mail : depending of OS, smpt, relaying, it can be 20 
differents method/tools to send a mail but the elements of it 
(from,to,subjet,body,attachment) are always the same.  With the indirect call, 
you can define wich is the "local" method to send a mail and never touch the 
main().

two pence.
Manu

Wjhonson  a écrit :


I've not encountered this is my career previously, but now I'm seeing a system 
written almost entirely with the use of indirect calls in Universe BASIC.

That is
SOURCE = "*SOME.PROGRAM"
...
CALL @SOURCE(INPUTS)

Is there some advantage to the use of indirect calls that a system would be 
written entirely in this fashion?


___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] Advantage of indirect call in BASIC

[Wols Lists]

On 04/12/12 00:38, Wjhonson wrote:
> I've not encountered this is my career previously, but now I'm seeing a 
> system written almost entirely with the use of indirect calls in Universe 
> BASIC.
> 
> That is
> SOURCE = "*SOME.PROGRAM"
> ...
> CALL @SOURCE(INPUTS)
> 
> Is there some advantage to the use of indirect calls that a system would be 
> written entirely in this fashion?
> 
I've sometimes done this, can't remember why.

BUT. This is *standard* OOP practice. If the guy was used to object
orientated programming, then he would expect this, and if he was not
using an OOP language (like BASIC), then he would have had to explicitly
code it - just like he's done here!

Cheers,
Wol
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] Advantage of indirect call in BASIC

[Wols Lists]

On 04/12/12 04:57, Israel, John R. wrote:
> As far as the number of arguments changing, I will often write a subroutine 
> with a few extra variables (FUTURE1, FUTURE2, FUTURE3) so that I do not need 
> to find all the existing programs that call it and recompile them.  It makes 
> this sort of thing a piece of cake.  The existing programs will likely not 
> need to populate the arguments other than initialized to null.
> 
While I didn't know about it way back when, you can actually test a
variable for "unassigned" so if you do that, you can just start your
subroutine with "if future1 is unassigned then set to null" etc.

Cheers,
Wol

> John Israel
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On Dec 3, 2012, at 9:28 PM, "Kate Stanton"  wrote:
> 
>> I would hate to see that in our software, as it would be so hard to find
>> where a subroutine is used.
>>
>> On the odd occasion we use this form (eg call depends on transaction type),
>> we do the definition just above, so it can be found.
>>
>> In my experience, the number of parameters is more likely to change that
>> the subroutine name.
>>
>> On 4 December 2012 13:38, Wjhonson  wrote:
>>
>>> I've not encountered this is my career previously, but now I'm seeing a
>>> system written almost entirely with the use of indirect calls in Universe
>>> BASIC.
>>>
>>> That is
>>> SOURCE = "*SOME.PROGRAM"
>>> ...
>>> CALL @SOURCE(INPUTS)
>>>
>>> Is there some advantage to the use of indirect calls that a system would
>>> be written entirely in this fashion?
>>>
>>>
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users