RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
You think that's old. When I started out, all we had were sticks and stone knives to cut notches in them. You do realise that you are showing U2 to be a sport of the pre-historic? My first experience with computers was paper tape. Version control was performed with a pencil on the leader of the tape. How many remember punch cards. How about a half a day turnaround to see if your program compiled? And the fun task of reading core dumps. Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation Dennis Bartlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/08/2008 03:21 AM Please respond to u2-users To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org cc: Subject:RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo You do realise that you are showing U2 to be a sport of the pre-historic? My first experience with computers was paper tape. Version control was performed with a pencil on the leader of the tape. How many remember punch cards. How about a half a day turnaround to see if your program compiled? And the fun task of reading core dumps. --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ This email was Anti Virus checked by Astaro Security Gateway. http://www.astaro.com --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
I would not say pre-historic. Those items mentioned are not that far removed. Remember how quickly vinyl left the shelves when CDs came into being. You do realize that you are showing U2 to be a sport of the pre-historic? / --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
You do realise that you are showing U2 to be a sport of the pre-historic? My first experience with computers was paper tape. Version control was performed with a pencil on the leader of the tape. How many remember punch cards. How about a half a day turnaround to see if your program compiled? And the fun task of reading core dumps. --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
Welll I use Notepad++ to edit, on a LIVE system, making every error instantly visible in 11 branches across a 300km range... yes, of course I'm using version control, its called panic 101, aka The Fire Station... Rex Gozar WROTE: You ARE using source code control tools (i.e. not home grown procedures), --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
Dennis, I've started to document the steps I've taken to cleanup bad code. You or anyone else interested can read them at: http://www.pickwiki.com/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Project_Cleansweep I'm not done since there is a lot to cover. I hope to add more over the next few weeks. rex Dennis Bartlett wrote: Welll I use Notepad++ to edit, on a LIVE system, making every error instantly visible in 11 branches across a 300km range... yes, of course I'm using version control, its called panic 101, aka The Fire Station... Rex Gozar WROTE: You ARE using source code control tools (i.e. not home grown procedures), --- 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/
RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
All I can say is, you must have a lot of free time. I sometimes have three or four projects going at the same time while also making bug fixes, helping users, managing the database, making minor changes to programs, and helping to train a new programmer. Some of our code is close to 20 years old. When I find free time to work on an older program I might get enough time to restructure the goto's out of it and I feel like I've accomplished something. There are three of us now, at one time we had 5. Jerry Banker -Original Message- From: Rex Gozar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 07, 2008 8:16 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo Dennis, I've started to document the steps I've taken to cleanup bad code. You or anyone else interested can read them at: http://www.pickwiki.com/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Project_Cleansweep I'm not done since there is a lot to cover. I hope to add more over the next few weeks. rex Dennis Bartlett wrote: Welll I use Notepad++ to edit, on a LIVE system, making every error instantly visible in 11 branches across a 300km range... yes, of course I'm using version control, its called panic 101, aka The Fire Station... Rex Gozar WROTE: You ARE using source code control tools (i.e. not home grown procedures), --- 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/
RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
All I can say is, you must have a lot of free time. I'm reminded of the old saying - if you want something doing, ask the busiest person. Brian --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
With more than 25 years in IT, this is what I have learned: *People remember quick for a day; they remember dirty forever.* - When I talked to a former CIO about quality and documentation, he said management expects best practices, and it is up to us programmers to deliver them. - We need to quit saying we can get it done quick in a day when it is a week-long job. - I have noticed that some programmers inflate their estimates by 10 times, just so they will look good finishing early. We have to be accurate, without lying. - Companies need to establish a threshold to determine when an application needs to be rewritten. This could be n years old or n modifications or when the program is unreadable. - The best IT practices I've seen include: - Coding standards (e.g. using loop/repeat instead of for/next) - Syntax standards (e.g. using @true and @false instead of 1 and 0) - Everybody uses the same case: UPPER, lower, or Mixed. - peer review for coding and syntax compliance (this really doesn't take long) - operations and user review of documentation BEFORE a program is installed. - programs are never installed on Friday. We have many members and companies that have established excellent best practices. It would be nice to have them on the U2UG wiki. -- Louie in Seattle --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
Jerry, Doing this kind of stuff doesn't take a lot of time; *learning* what to do and how to do it takes a whole lot more. Your programmers have probably already lost more productive hours than it takes to clean the trash up. You'll also spot bugs a whole lot faster, furthering your productivity and reducing IT costs. rex Jerry Banker wrote: All I can say is, you must have a lot of free time... --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
We must remember that programming and computers in general has changed much since the beginning. How many remember punch cards. Can programmers today relate to a time when programmers submitted there code to be placed on punched cards? How about a half a day turnaround to see if your program compiled? And the fun task of reading core dumps. There are many factors to consider. --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
Or listening to the core play their favorite song on the transistor radio placed on top of the memory subsystem. :) Jerry Banker -Original Message- From: Tim Stokes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 07, 2008 2:47 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo We must remember that programming and computers in general has changed much since the beginning. How many remember punch cards. Can programmers today relate to a time when programmers submitted there code to be placed on punched cards? How about a half a day turnaround to see if your program compiled? And the fun task of reading core dumps. There are many factors to consider. --- 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/
RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
We must remember that programming and computers in general has changed much since the beginning. How many remember punch cards. Can programmers today relate to a time when programmers submitted their code to be placed on punched cards? Sure can. I usually had to do my own keypunching, especially when working late. Wish I had a buck for every time a compile failed because I absent-mindedly stuck the old card back in the deck and threw away the new one. And the fun task of reading core dumps. All I can say is, you have a strange notion of fun. As long as we are waxing nostalgic, how about old-master, new-master update processing on sequential files? Or the ear-splitting sound of old line printers with the cover open? The unique sound of a 1403-N1 printing a barber-pole test pattern? I don't miss the good old days at all. === Norman Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.brake.com === When you do a good deed, get a receipt, just in case heaven is like the IRS === --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
Oh, the good old days... My first experience with computers was paper tape. Version control was performed with a pencil on the leader of the tape. I do miss the flashy lights though... Cheers, David Murray -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Stokes Sent: Friday, March 07, 2008 3:47 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo We must remember that programming and computers in general has changed much since the beginning. How many remember punch cards. Can programmers today relate to a time when programmers submitted there code to be placed on punched cards? How about a half a day turnaround to see if your program compiled? And the fun task of reading core dumps. There are many factors to consider. --- 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/
RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
Well, THANKS for that - because that is precisely what I'm doing right now... looping thru dicts to create attribute equates... Perhaps we should have an area we can post all these utilities so we don't have to reinvent the wheel every time... Anyone? -Original Message- Rex Gozar wrote: I inherited similar bad code. It too used F1, F2... for file variables, hardcoded attribute numbers, etc.. I wrote a utility to generate INCLUDE files for attribute equates. Then I wrote another utility to rename the file variables and change the hardcoded attribute numbers to named constants (equates). --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
Dennis, I'll try to post my utilities to www.PickWiki.com for you and anyone else interested. There may be similar utilities there, but I was striving to get the programs here to conform to a specific coding standard (already posted on PickWiki). Your standards may be drastically different, making my utilities useless to you. I'll let you know when I'm done. I firmly believe that shoddy programming has hurt the credibility of Pick in general, and we (the Pick community) should take active steps to change that image. rex P.S. You ARE using source code control tools (i.e. not home grown procedures), right? Dennis Bartlett wrote: Well, THANKS for that - because that is precisely what I'm doing right now... looping thru dicts to create attribute equates... Perhaps we should have an area we can post all these utilities so we don't have to reinvent the wheel every time... Anyone? -Original Message- Rex Gozar wrote: I inherited similar bad code. It too used F1, F2... for file variables, hardcoded attribute numbers, etc.. I wrote a utility to generate INCLUDE files for attribute equates. Then I wrote another utility to rename the file variables and change the hardcoded attribute numbers to named constants (equates). --- 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/
RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
As someone once told me; The great thing about Pick is you can sit down at your kitchen table and write an entire application. The bad thing about Pick is people sit down at their kitchen tables and write applications :) -Original Message- I firmly believe that shoddy programming has hurt the credibility of Pick in general, and we (the Pick community) should take active steps to change that image. --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
I don't think the shoddy programming issue is localized to Pick/MV people only. Shoddy programming has eroded the confidence in our entire profession irrespective of language, database, tools, etc. and yes, application development is a profession - and all that implies - not a career nor merely a job. --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
Kevin said I don't think the shoddy programming issue is localized to Pick/MV people only. Shoddy programming has eroded the confidence in our entire profession irrespective of language, database, tools, etc. and yes, application development is a profession - and all that implies - not a career nor merely a job. I agree with what Kevin says, but it's not the programmer's fault as much as management. (and I have spent more time in management than programming). When I was trained in the early 80s, I was led to expect that I would go out into a maintenance programming job. In the following 25 years, I have never had the luxury of keeping up with maintenance programming. There are always more requests piling up and not enough resources to complete them. The companies I have worked for treat IT people as undesireable costs, not asset generators. This is further complicated by the fact that the field is exploding in terms of the number of areas that there are to learn about. Based on what I see coming out of University's. nobody is taking time to teach the importance of writing maintainable code. I suspect that programming is not the only area where this is happening either. Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
While I believe there's ample blame to go around, it remains up to each person to choose how they approach the obstacles of this profession. As a consultant I am periodically assigned to tasks where cutting a few corners might be the only way to achieve the improbable objective on the impossible timeline. Yet, knowing that support is the only part of the project lifecycle that has no definitive end date, I'd rather come in slightly over budget (or eat a couple of hours) if doing the job right (vs cutting corners) is going to save everyone tons of cash over the long haul. And if recent conversations are any indication, I don't believe this is all that unique of an attitude. There are, however, decades of bad to be overcome, and while it doesn't happen overnight, it doesn't mean it can't happen over time. As to the new blood coming into the industry, I think you're spot on; academia can only do so much and the attention to quality is only one facet of increasingly complex curricula. To a degree, I wonder if the definition of quality would be different for those who have decades of walking the minefields of bad code vs. those that merely teach the syntax and semantics? In the end, it's all a matter of cost, or as the old commercial used to say: You can pay me now or pay me later ...however, in technology a well spent dollar can save millions. And on that note, I'll be speaking more about this very topic of saving millions at Spectrum, first at breakfast on 4/1 and then in a session on... Thursday, I believe. See y'all then. I agree with what Kevin says, but it's not the programmer's fault as much as management. [snip] Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ -- -Kevin http://www.PrecisOnline.com --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
You're a genius...!!! Thanks for that - added a blank line and all is happy! dennis David Beaty wrote: Does the BP version of this item have a blank line at the end? We've experience problems with INCLUDES that don't have that. Dennis Bartlett wrote: 0033 WRITESEQ LOG.FILE ON F.FEEDBACK ELSE STOP 'DISK FULL' 0034 RETURN 0035 * --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
Womack, Adrian skrev: Does anyone else think it's bad practice to have code in INCLUDES? I do !Warning this is a classical religious war issue! Surely it would be much better to have the INITIATE.FEEDBACK GIVE.FEEDBACK routines written as subroutines, and then simply call them from the appropriate spots. If the code in either of those routines needs to be changed, you'll need to also recompile all the programs using the include. But as subroutines all you need to do is recompile the subroutine in question. And what's worse: Every time you add a variable in the include you must search all routines that use the include to check that they do not use that name .. unless you have a rigid naming convention to prevent such name reuse. Although, INCLUDES are fantastic for things like common equate definitions. Well - the same argument applies here, but the naming convention often comes quite naturally - at least in my experience. -- mats --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
It is a maintenance nightmare from the 1980s that needs to be corrected. Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 12:14:57 +0100 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo Womack, Adrian skrev: Does anyone else think it's bad practice to have code in INCLUDES? I do !Warning this is a classical religious war issue! Surely it would be much better to have the INITIATE.FEEDBACK GIVE.FEEDBACK routines written as subroutines, and then simply call them from the appropriate spots. If the code in either of those routines needs to be changed, you'll need to also recompile all the programs using the include. But as subroutines all you need to do is recompile the subroutine in question. And what's worse: Every time you add a variable in the include you must search all routines that use the include to check that they do not use that name .. unless you have a rigid naming convention to prevent such name reuse. Although, INCLUDES are fantastic for things like common equate definitions. Well - the same argument applies here, but the naming convention often comes quite naturally - at least in my experience. -- mats --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ _ Connect and share in new ways with Windows Live. http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_012008 --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
Currently the system uses the following coding structure: OPEN 'HPMAST.FILE' TO F1 ELSE STOP OPEN 'HPCONTRACT' TO F2 ELSE STOP OPEN 'HPTRANS.FILE' TO F3 ELSE STOP READ F1R FROM F1, KEY THEN... READ F2R FROM F2, KEY THEN... READ F3R FROM F3, KEY THEN... F1R36,X = F2R13 / F3R82 * F1R8 + F3R43 Just understanding the code takes a lot of backwards and forwards thru code. This wouldn't be so bad if they had at least standardised of F1 always being HPMAST, but they didn't, so the next program does this OPEN 'HPCONTRACT' TO F1 ELSE STOP OPEN 'HPTRANS.FILE' TO F2 ELSE STOP OPEN 'HPMAST.FILE' TO F3 ELSE STOP READ F1R FROM F1, KEY THEN... READ F2R FROM F2, KEY THEN... READ F3R FROM F3, KEY THEN... F1R36,X = F2R13 / F3R82 * F1R8 + F3R43 The formula at the bottom looks identical to the formula above but it's a totally different file / field combo. Multiply this by around 1700 programs and you begin to get a sense of what I face. If a program hits a file or record error it simply stops with no feedback to the user that the update is complete. Data integrity is an illusion. The system has been migrated from Pick, but without all the code being converted. As a result one has to try compile with a PICK compile, and if that fails, try a universe style compile. The dictionaries for the most part contain only F1, F2, F3 with the heading correct some of the time, and fields in use that do not appear in the dictionaries. Thus far I have started changing code to always open HPMAST to F.HPMAST, and to always read HPMAST into HPMAST.R. Code takes on a whole new meaning when you know what file you're working with. An additional swing is that every summary total is always calculated - nothing is stored. This means that every program that ever displays ARREARS for example has the code to calculate arrears in it. That makes 200 separate routines with the exact same code in it, just with differing file variables (ie not a simple swap out). The code needs to be changed, errors need to be trapped, and duplicated code weeded out but the time to rewrite complete code doesn't exist. Using included code allows me (the only full time programmer) to phase in the changes as time permits. The idea is to phase the new code into the system as and when a program is modified. Most programs create qpointers to the various (15) branches, then open the the qpointed files. The method of doing this varies considerably from program to program, with a bewildering array of possible file handles - my plan is to create ideal code for opening, reading, writing files, stored in SNIPPETS. I have started converting the opens to a standard, eg F.HPMAST, and read a standard record, eg HPMAST.R. Keys variables are set to a standard to allow the use of INCLUDES. Standardises READ includes, WRITE includes all preset with error trapping code. The theory behind the includes thing is that one can still produce a full listing of the code to debug if required. One can change just a read and write in a program without having to get involved in other files in the routine (really messy but allows the process to start and proceed on a very part time basis). Recompiling everything is far less tiring than trying to concentrate and not leave out code whilst being moved from fire to fire, besides which having it all in SNIPPETS allows me to get it right in one place and know that correction is being filtered into the whole system by a simple recompile. Adrian Womack wrote: Does anyone else think it's bad practice to have code in INCLUDES? Surely it would be much better to have the INITIATE.FEEDBACK GIVE.FEEDBACK routines written as subroutines, and then simply call them from the appropriate spots. --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
Hi Kate, Yes its been solved - the included code needed to have a blank line at the end of it. Simple but not something I might have thought of! Hope it works for you... dennis -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kate Stanton Sent: 05 March 2008 06:00 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo Hi Dennis, Have you solved this? When I have run into trouble with INCLUDE, I have copied the code into my program and compiled. The problem then usually becomes obvious. Have you tried this? Cheers, Kate - Original Message - From: Dennis Bartlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 8:11 PM Subject: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo I have an INCLUDE statement that brings in code from a snippets file called SNIPPETS. INCLUDE SNIPPETS GIVE.FEEDBACK If I compile the compiler hangs as it hits the include statement. If I then change it to include from BP INCLUDE BP GIVE.FEEDBACK it works fine. What am I doing wrong? --- 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/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.21.4/1310 - Release Date: 2008/03/04 08:35 AM --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
Hey, in a normal world I would agree. No religious war needed... ;-) Thanks for the heads up - its something I'll put a bit more thought into... Its just the magnitude of what I have to achieve that's pushing me this way. I'm currently getting around a hour to work on a particular source code before being given a new urgent task. This way I believe I can make headway. Phase 1 is to take the common ARREARS code out of each program and place it in SNIPPETS with a naming convention that describes where it comes from. eg code taken from HPPOSTCASHDEF in HPBP gets stored in SNIPPETS as ARREARS.CALC.HPBP.HPPOSTCASHDEF.INST1 (each instance of the common code within the program source stored separately) Phase 2: Once all ARREARS calculation code has been extracted from all programs I can normalise the code into the same variables (just for comparison purposes) to work out just how many programs have identical code, and which ones do something different). All those with common code need to have one subroutine created, and the subroutine called from every program referenced in SNIPPETS starting with ARREARS.CALC... -Original Message- Mats wrote I do !Warning this is a classical religious war issue! --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
It is a maintenance nightmare from the 1980s that needs to be corrected. Agreed. I started here on Jan 7th. I've so far been assigned 97 tasks, each in some state of investigation / repair before the next one hits. At this rate, with no hope of time to do a thorough overhaul, I had to find a means of moving forward incrementally, even if just to give me hope that maintenance will become easier. --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
Whatever salary you're making, it's not enough! :) -Dianne Dennis Bartlett wrote: Currently the system uses the following coding structure: OPEN 'HPMAST.FILE' TO F1 ELSE STOP OPEN 'HPCONTRACT' TO F2 ELSE STOP OPEN 'HPTRANS.FILE' TO F3 ELSE STOP READ F1R FROM F1, KEY THEN... READ F2R FROM F2, KEY THEN... READ F3R FROM F3, KEY THEN... F1R36,X = F2R13 / F3R82 * F1R8 + F3R43 Just understanding the code takes a lot of backwards and forwards thru code. This wouldn't be so bad if they had at least standardised of F1 always being HPMAST, but they didn't, so the next program does this OPEN 'HPCONTRACT' TO F1 ELSE STOP OPEN 'HPTRANS.FILE' TO F2 ELSE STOP OPEN 'HPMAST.FILE' TO F3 ELSE STOP READ F1R FROM F1, KEY THEN... READ F2R FROM F2, KEY THEN... READ F3R FROM F3, KEY THEN... F1R36,X = F2R13 / F3R82 * F1R8 + F3R43 The formula at the bottom looks identical to the formula above but it's a totally different file / field combo. Multiply this by around 1700 programs and you begin to get a sense of what I face. If a program hits a file or record error it simply stops with no feedback to the user that the update is complete. Data integrity is an illusion. The system has been migrated from Pick, but without all the code being converted. As a result one has to try compile with a PICK compile, and if that fails, try a universe style compile. The dictionaries for the most part contain only F1, F2, F3 with the heading correct some of the time, and fields in use that do not appear in the dictionaries. Thus far I have started changing code to always open HPMAST to F.HPMAST, and to always read HPMAST into HPMAST.R. Code takes on a whole new meaning when you know what file you're working with. An additional swing is that every summary total is always calculated - nothing is stored. This means that every program that ever displays ARREARS for example has the code to calculate arrears in it. That makes 200 separate routines with the exact same code in it, just with differing file variables (ie not a simple swap out). The code needs to be changed, errors need to be trapped, and duplicated code weeded out but the time to rewrite complete code doesn't exist. Using included code allows me (the only full time programmer) to phase in the changes as time permits. The idea is to phase the new code into the system as and when a program is modified. Most programs create qpointers to the various (15) branches, then open the the qpointed files. The method of doing this varies considerably from program to program, with a bewildering array of possible file handles - my plan is to create ideal code for opening, reading, writing files, stored in SNIPPETS. I have started converting the opens to a standard, eg F.HPMAST, and read a standard record, eg HPMAST.R. Keys variables are set to a standard to allow the use of INCLUDES. Standardises READ includes, WRITE includes all preset with error trapping code. The theory behind the includes thing is that one can still produce a full listing of the code to debug if required. One can change just a read and write in a program without having to get involved in other files in the routine (really messy but allows the process to start and proceed on a very part time basis). Recompiling everything is far less tiring than trying to concentrate and not leave out code whilst being moved from fire to fire, besides which having it all in SNIPPETS allows me to get it right in one place and know that correction is being filtered into the whole system by a simple recompile. Adrian Womack wrote: Does anyone else think it's bad practice to have code in INCLUDES? Surely it would be much better to have the INITIATE.FEEDBACK GIVE.FEEDBACK routines written as subroutines, and then simply call them from the appropriate spots. --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
Only thing is that if you used subroutines - you would only have to recompile the subroutines. :-) For example (with no error checking flags, etc - no use of COMMON, etc) CALL OPEN.THAT.FILE(F.HPMAST,HPMAST.FILE) WAITFLAG = False CALL LOCK.THAT.RECORD(F.HPMAST,HPMAST.KEY,WAITFLAG) CALL READ.THAT.RECORD(HPMAST.REC,F.HPMAST,HPMAST.KEY) CALL WRITE.THAT.RECORD(HPMAST.REC,F.HPMAST,HPMAST.KEY) CALL RELEASE.THAT.LOCK(F.HPMAST,HPMAST.KEY) CALL CLOSE.THAT.FILE(F.HPMAST) Where I see value in the $INCLUDE would be the formulas and standard equates. Such as the following EQU True TO 1 EQU False TO 0 EQU ThatName TO HPMAST.REC1 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dennis Bartlett Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 9:57 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo Currently the system uses the following coding structure: OPEN 'HPMAST.FILE' TO F1 ELSE STOP OPEN 'HPCONTRACT' TO F2 ELSE STOP OPEN 'HPTRANS.FILE' TO F3 ELSE STOP READ F1R FROM F1, KEY THEN... READ F2R FROM F2, KEY THEN... READ F3R FROM F3, KEY THEN... F1R36,X = F2R13 / F3R82 * F1R8 + F3R43 Just understanding the code takes a lot of backwards and forwards thru code. This wouldn't be so bad if they had at least standardised of F1 always being HPMAST, but they didn't, so the next program does this OPEN 'HPCONTRACT' TO F1 ELSE STOP OPEN 'HPTRANS.FILE' TO F2 ELSE STOP OPEN 'HPMAST.FILE' TO F3 ELSE STOP READ F1R FROM F1, KEY THEN... READ F2R FROM F2, KEY THEN... READ F3R FROM F3, KEY THEN... F1R36,X = F2R13 / F3R82 * F1R8 + F3R43 The formula at the bottom looks identical to the formula above but it's a totally different file / field combo. Multiply this by around 1700 programs and you begin to get a sense of what I face. If a program hits a file or record error it simply stops with no feedback to the user that the update is complete. Data integrity is an illusion. The system has been migrated from Pick, but without all the code being converted. As a result one has to try compile with a PICK compile, and if that fails, try a universe style compile. The dictionaries for the most part contain only F1, F2, F3 with the heading correct some of the time, and fields in use that do not appear in the dictionaries. Thus far I have started changing code to always open HPMAST to F.HPMAST, and to always read HPMAST into HPMAST.R. Code takes on a whole new meaning when you know what file you're working with. An additional swing is that every summary total is always calculated - nothing is stored. This means that every program that ever displays ARREARS for example has the code to calculate arrears in it. That makes 200 separate routines with the exact same code in it, just with differing file variables (ie not a simple swap out). The code needs to be changed, errors need to be trapped, and duplicated code weeded out but the time to rewrite complete code doesn't exist. Using included code allows me (the only full time programmer) to phase in the changes as time permits. The idea is to phase the new code into the system as and when a program is modified. Most programs create qpointers to the various (15) branches, then open the the qpointed files. The method of doing this varies considerably from program to program, with a bewildering array of possible file handles - my plan is to create ideal code for opening, reading, writing files, stored in SNIPPETS. I have started converting the opens to a standard, eg F.HPMAST, and read a standard record, eg HPMAST.R. Keys variables are set to a standard to allow the use of INCLUDES. Standardises READ includes, WRITE includes all preset with error trapping code. The theory behind the includes thing is that one can still produce a full listing of the code to debug if required. One can change just a read and write in a program without having to get involved in other files in the routine (really messy but allows the process to start and proceed on a very part time basis). Recompiling everything is far less tiring than trying to concentrate and not leave out code whilst being moved from fire to fire, besides which having it all in SNIPPETS allows me to get it right in one place and know that correction is being filtered into the whole system by a simple recompile. Adrian Womack wrote: Does anyone else think it's bad practice to have code in INCLUDES? Surely it would be much better to have the INITIATE.FEEDBACK GIVE.FEEDBACK routines written as subroutines, and then simply call them from the appropriate spots. --- 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/
Re: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
When I see difficult UNIBASIC code, I just remember RPL. Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation Whatever salary you're making, it's not enough! :) -Dianne Dennis Bartlett wrote: Currently the system uses the following coding structure: OPEN 'HPMAST.FILE' TO F1 ELSE STOP OPEN 'HPCONTRACT' TO F2 ELSE STOP OPEN 'HPTRANS.FILE' TO F3 ELSE STOP READ F1R FROM F1, KEY THEN... READ F2R FROM F2, KEY THEN... READ F3R FROM F3, KEY THEN... F1R36,X = F2R13 / F3R82 * F1R8 + F3R43 Just understanding the code takes a lot of backwards and forwards thru code. --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
Dianne is correct. Your code looks like it was built by a CASE tool. Jerry Banker -Original Message- From: Dianne Ackerman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 9:28 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo Whatever salary you're making, it's not enough! :) -Dianne Dennis Bartlett wrote: Currently the system uses the following coding structure: OPEN 'HPMAST.FILE' TO F1 ELSE STOP OPEN 'HPCONTRACT' TO F2 ELSE STOP OPEN 'HPTRANS.FILE' TO F3 ELSE STOP READ F1R FROM F1, KEY THEN... READ F2R FROM F2, KEY THEN... READ F3R FROM F3, KEY THEN... F1R36,X = F2R13 / F3R82 * F1R8 + F3R43 Just understanding the code takes a lot of backwards and forwards thru code. This wouldn't be so bad if they had at least standardised of F1 always being HPMAST, but they didn't, so the next program does this OPEN 'HPCONTRACT' TO F1 ELSE STOP OPEN 'HPTRANS.FILE' TO F2 ELSE STOP OPEN 'HPMAST.FILE' TO F3 ELSE STOP READ F1R FROM F1, KEY THEN... READ F2R FROM F2, KEY THEN... READ F3R FROM F3, KEY THEN... F1R36,X = F2R13 / F3R82 * F1R8 + F3R43 The formula at the bottom looks identical to the formula above but it's a totally different file / field combo. Multiply this by around 1700 programs and you begin to get a sense of what I face. If a program hits a file or record error it simply stops with no feedback to the user that the update is complete. Data integrity is an illusion. The system has been migrated from Pick, but without all the code being converted. As a result one has to try compile with a PICK compile, and if that fails, try a universe style compile. The dictionaries for the most part contain only F1, F2, F3 with the heading correct some of the time, and fields in use that do not appear in the dictionaries. Thus far I have started changing code to always open HPMAST to F.HPMAST, and to always read HPMAST into HPMAST.R. Code takes on a whole new meaning when you know what file you're working with. An additional swing is that every summary total is always calculated - nothing is stored. This means that every program that ever displays ARREARS for example has the code to calculate arrears in it. That makes 200 separate routines with the exact same code in it, just with differing file variables (ie not a simple swap out). The code needs to be changed, errors need to be trapped, and duplicated code weeded out but the time to rewrite complete code doesn't exist. Using included code allows me (the only full time programmer) to phase in the changes as time permits. The idea is to phase the new code into the system as and when a program is modified. Most programs create qpointers to the various (15) branches, then open the the qpointed files. The method of doing this varies considerably from program to program, with a bewildering array of possible file handles - my plan is to create ideal code for opening, reading, writing files, stored in SNIPPETS. I have started converting the opens to a standard, eg F.HPMAST, and read a standard record, eg HPMAST.R. Keys variables are set to a standard to allow the use of INCLUDES. Standardises READ includes, WRITE includes all preset with error trapping code. The theory behind the includes thing is that one can still produce a full listing of the code to debug if required. One can change just a read and write in a program without having to get involved in other files in the routine (really messy but allows the process to start and proceed on a very part time basis). Recompiling everything is far less tiring than trying to concentrate and not leave out code whilst being moved from fire to fire, besides which having it all in SNIPPETS allows me to get it right in one place and know that correction is being filtered into the whole system by a simple recompile. Adrian Womack wrote: Does anyone else think it's bad practice to have code in INCLUDES? Surely it would be much better to have the INITIATE.FEEDBACK GIVE.FEEDBACK routines written as subroutines, and then simply call them from the appropriate spots. --- 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/
RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
We had the same problem where the INCLUDE file was dropped onto a samba share from source-safe. The fix was to read each program entry in and write it out with a trailing attribute mark. This was a problem for more than includes. Once I did that, everything worked OK. It was some weird EOF condition. Here is the program I use to fix it: * This program fixes up end-of-item situation that causes universe * compiler to hang on programs. * EQU TRUE TO 1, FALSE TO 0 * FILENAME=OLEDB.INCLUDES GOSUB FIXFILE FILENAME=OLEDB.PROGRAMS GOSUB FIXFILE STOP * FIXFILE: * * OPEN FILENAME TO FILE ELSE STOP 201,FILENAME SELECT FILE FINISHED=FALSE LOOP READNEXT ID ELSE FINISHED=TRUE END UNTIL FINISHED DO READ ITEM FROM FILE, ID THEN ITEM-1= LOOP WHILE ITEM NE '' AND ITEM[LEN(ITEM),1] EQ CHAR(254) DO ITEM=ITEM[1,LEN(ITEM)-1] REPEAT WRITE ITEM ON FILE, ID END REPEAT RETURN * END -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kate Stanton Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 8:00 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo Hi Dennis, Have you solved this? When I have run into trouble with INCLUDE, I have copied the code into my program and compiled. The problem then usually becomes obvious. Have you tried this? Cheers, Kate - Original Message - From: Dennis Bartlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 8:11 PM Subject: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo I have an INCLUDE statement that brings in code from a snippets file called SNIPPETS. INCLUDE SNIPPETS GIVE.FEEDBACK If I compile the compiler hangs as it hits the include statement. If I then change it to include from BP INCLUDE BP GIVE.FEEDBACK it works fine. What am I doing wrong? --- 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/
RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
And here I am complaining... I documented a library system written entirely in PROC.. boy, I am giving my age away... -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 05 March 2008 07:10 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo When I see difficult UNIBASIC code, I just remember RPL. --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
Now, now, now - you can write bad code in any language - or you can write good code. I worked with someone who learned RPL first and her RPL code was very easy to read and maintain. She did not want to learn Basic because the Basic programmers who had preceeded us at that site wrote cryptic (and bug-ridden) Basic. When I showed her my code, she was amazed - she had thought that Basic required the unreadable style she had seen from the others. I actually liked RPL! Susan Lynch FW Davison Company, Inc. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 12:10 PM Subject: Re: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo When I see difficult UNIBASIC code, I just remember RPL. Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation Whatever salary you're making, it's not enough! :) -Dianne Dennis Bartlett wrote: Currently the system uses the following coding structure: OPEN 'HPMAST.FILE' TO F1 ELSE STOP OPEN 'HPCONTRACT' TO F2 ELSE STOP OPEN 'HPTRANS.FILE' TO F3 ELSE STOP READ F1R FROM F1, KEY THEN... READ F2R FROM F2, KEY THEN... READ F3R FROM F3, KEY THEN... F1R36,X = F2R13 / F3R82 * F1R8 + F3R43 Just understanding the code takes a lot of backwards and forwards thru code. --- 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/
Re: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
Susan Wrote: Now, now, now - you can write bad code in any language... You're right there. I've proved it many times. I actually liked RPL! So you're the one! Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
Dennis, I inherited similar bad code. It too used F1, F2... for file variables, hardcoded attribute numbers, etc.. Over 10% of the programs would not compile without some warning or error. I wrote a utility to generate INCLUDE files for attribute equates. Then I wrote another utility to rename the file variables and change the hardcoded attribute numbers to named constants (equates). I kept all changes in source code control (CVS) in case I needed to revert to a backup. I did this as sidework, so it took me a couple weeks to create the utilities; it only took a few minutes to run them, but it took a couple more weeks to review ALL the code changes (using diff tools). The effort was well worth it. It made debugging and development easy. I would encourage you or anyone else in a similar situation to do the same. rex P.S. I also had to create a utility to space out statements in a consistent way so the diff tools wouldn't report false positives. Dennis Bartlett wrote: Currently the system uses the following coding structure: OPEN 'HPMAST.FILE' TO F1 ELSE STOP OPEN 'HPCONTRACT' TO F2 ELSE STOP OPEN 'HPTRANS.FILE' TO F3 ELSE STOP READ F1R FROM F1, KEY THEN... READ F2R FROM F2, KEY THEN... READ F3R FROM F3, KEY THEN... F1R36,X = F2R13 / F3R82 * F1R8 + F3R43 Just understanding the code takes a lot of backwards and forwards thru code. This wouldn't be so bad if they had at least standardised of F1 always being HPMAST, but they didn't, so the next program does this OPEN 'HPCONTRACT' TO F1 ELSE STOP OPEN 'HPTRANS.FILE' TO F2 ELSE STOP OPEN 'HPMAST.FILE' TO F3 ELSE STOP READ F1R FROM F1, KEY THEN... READ F2R FROM F2, KEY THEN... READ F3R FROM F3, KEY THEN... F1R36,X = F2R13 / F3R82 * F1R8 + F3R43 The formula at the bottom looks identical to the formula above but it's a totally different file / field combo. Multiply this by around 1700 programs and you begin to get a sense of what I face. If a program hits a file or record error it simply stops with no feedback to the user that the update is complete. Data integrity is an illusion. The system has been migrated from Pick, but without all the code being converted. As a result one has to try compile with a PICK compile, and if that fails, try a universe style compile. The dictionaries for the most part contain only F1, F2, F3 with the heading correct some of the time, and fields in use that do not appear in the dictionaries. Thus far I have started changing code to always open HPMAST to F.HPMAST, and to always read HPMAST into HPMAST.R. Code takes on a whole new meaning when you know what file you're working with. An additional swing is that every summary total is always calculated - nothing is stored. This means that every program that ever displays ARREARS for example has the code to calculate arrears in it. That makes 200 separate routines with the exact same code in it, just with differing file variables (ie not a simple swap out). The code needs to be changed, errors need to be trapped, and duplicated code weeded out but the time to rewrite complete code doesn't exist. Using included code allows me (the only full time programmer) to phase in the changes as time permits. The idea is to phase the new code into the system as and when a program is modified. Most programs create qpointers to the various (15) branches, then open the the qpointed files. The method of doing this varies considerably from program to program, with a bewildering array of possible file handles - my plan is to create ideal code for opening, reading, writing files, stored in SNIPPETS. I have started converting the opens to a standard, eg F.HPMAST, and read a standard record, eg HPMAST.R. Keys variables are set to a standard to allow the use of INCLUDES. Standardises READ includes, WRITE includes all preset with error trapping code. The theory behind the includes thing is that one can still produce a full listing of the code to debug if required. One can change just a read and write in a program without having to get involved in other files in the routine (really messy but allows the process to start and proceed on a very part time basis). Recompiling everything is far less tiring than trying to concentrate and not leave out code whilst being moved from fire to fire, besides which having it all in SNIPPETS allows me to get it right in one place and know that correction is being filtered into the whole system by a simple recompile. Adrian Womack wrote: Does anyone else think it's bad practice to have code in INCLUDES? Surely it would be much better to have the INITIATE.FEEDBACK GIVE.FEEDBACK routines written as subroutines, and then simply call them from the appropriate spots. --- 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/
Re: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
Do you have a VOC entry for SNIPPETS ? Is SNIPPETS a Type 1/19 file? Is there a record called GIVE.FEEDBACK in SNIPPETS ? Does the compiler time out after a while (say five minutes) or hang interminably ? - Original Message - From: Dennis Bartlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 09:11:35 +0200 I have an INCLUDE statement that brings in code from a snippets file called SNIPPETS. INCLUDE SNIPPETS GIVE.FEEDBACK If I compile the compiler hangs as it hits the include statement. If I then change it to include from BP INCLUDE BP GIVE.FEEDBACK it works fine. What am I doing wrong? --- 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/
RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
Check that the SNIPPETS file is type 1 or 19 I use $INCLUDE also. Regards David Jordan --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
SNIPPETS
0001: F
0002: SNIPPETS
0003: D_SNIPPETS
A type 1 file
GIVE.FEEDBACK
0001 * GIVE.FEEDBACK
0002 * D.Bartlett 03Mar08
0003 * updates the file sent by BLAT by email
0004 *
0005 * expects a variable 'FEEDBACK'
0006 * containing the message to add to the logfile
0007 *
0008 INITIATE.FEEDBACK:
0009 LOG.ERROR = 0
0010 CRLF = CHAR(13):CHAR(10)
0011 LOG.DATE = OCONV(DATE(),'D4/')
0012 LOG.DATE = LOG.DATE[7,4]:LOG.DATE[4,2]:LOG.DATE[1,2]
0013 FEEDBACK = STR('=',40)
0014 FEEDBACK := CRLF:'WELCOME TO FEEDBACK ---':LOG.DATE
0015 FEEDBACK := CRLF
0016 FEEDBACK := CRLF:'The overnight automatic emailer...'
0017 FEEDBACK := CRLF
0018 FEEDBACK := CRLF:'Never again do you have to wonder.. did that
thing run?'
0019 FEEDBACK := CRLF:'FEEDBACK will mail you the results of every
overnight'
0020 FEEDBACK := CRLF:run... now ain't that cool?
0021 FEEDBACK := CRLF
0022 OPENSEQ 'INTEGRITY','FEEDBACK' TO F.FEEDBACK ELSE NULL
0023 WEOFSEQ F.FEEDBACK
0024 WRITESEQ FEEDBACK ON F.FEEDBACK ELSE STOP'DISK FULL'
0025 RETURN
0026 *
0027 GIVE.FEEDBACK:
0028 IF (LOG.ERROR) THEN RETURN
0029 LOG.DATE = OCONV(DATE(),'D4/')
0030 LOG.TIME = OCONV(TIME(),'MTHS')
0031 LOG.DATE =
LOG.DATE[7,4]:LOG.DATE[4,2]:LOG.DATE[1,2]:'::':LOG.TIME
0032 LOG.FILE = LOG.DATE:: :FEEDBACK
0033 WRITESEQ LOG.FILE ON F.FEEDBACK ELSE STOP 'DISK FULL'
0034 RETURN
0035 *
Every program has the following type of error message
OPEN 'VOC' TO VOC ELSE
FEEDBACK = DAILY,SETTLEMENT,CANNOT OPEN VOC,DIDNT RUN
GOSUB GIVE.FEEDBACK
STOP 'VOC FILE'
END
and once a day the FEEDBACK file sent, using BLAT, via email to me every
morning...
feedback.bat
blat p:\INTEGRITY\FEEDBACK -to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and finally feedback.bat is automated to happen at 6AM every morning.
Voila!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray Wurlod
Sent: 04 March 2008 10:21 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
Do you have a VOC entry for SNIPPETS ?
Is SNIPPETS a Type 1/19 file?
Is there a record called GIVE.FEEDBACK in SNIPPETS ?
Does the compiler time out after a while (say five minutes) or hang
interminably ?
- Original Message -
From: Dennis Bartlett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 09:11:35 +0200
I have an INCLUDE statement that brings in code from a snippets file
called
SNIPPETS.
INCLUDE SNIPPETS GIVE.FEEDBACK
If I compile the compiler hangs as it hits the include statement.
If I then change it to include from BP
INCLUDE BP GIVE.FEEDBACK
it works fine.
What am I doing wrong?
---
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/
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.21.4/1309 - Release Date: 2008/03/03
06:50 PM
---
u2-users mailing list
u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
Dennis If you're using BLAT I assume you're on Windows. I've seen an INCLUDE hang if the included file doesn't have a terminating CRLF. Go into the editor and file it again and see if the problem persists. Brian I have an INCLUDE statement that brings in code from a snippets file called SNIPPETS. INCLUDE SNIPPETS GIVE.FEEDBACK If I compile the compiler hangs as it hits the include statement. If I then change it to include from BP INCLUDE BP GIVE.FEEDBACK it works fine. What am I doing wrong? --- 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/
RE: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
Does anyone else think it's bad practice to have code in INCLUDES? Surely it would be much better to have the INITIATE.FEEDBACK GIVE.FEEDBACK routines written as subroutines, and then simply call them from the appropriate spots. If the code in either of those routines needs to be changed, you'll need to also recompile all the programs using the include. But as subroutines all you need to do is recompile the subroutine in question. Although, INCLUDES are fantastic for things like common equate definitions. Adrian DISCLAIMER: Disclaimer. This e-mail is private and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please advise us by return e-mail immediately, and delete the e-mail and any attachments without using or disclosing the contents in any way. The views expressed in this e-mail are those of the author, and do not represent those of this company unless this is clearly indicated. You should scan this e-mail and any attachments for viruses. This company accepts no liability for any direct or indirect damage or loss resulting from the use of any attachments to this e-mail. --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo
Hi Dennis, Have you solved this? When I have run into trouble with INCLUDE, I have copied the code into my program and compiled. The problem then usually becomes obvious. Have you tried this? Cheers, Kate - Original Message - From: Dennis Bartlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 8:11 PM Subject: [U2] INCLUDE weirdo I have an INCLUDE statement that brings in code from a snippets file called SNIPPETS. INCLUDE SNIPPETS GIVE.FEEDBACK If I compile the compiler hangs as it hits the include statement. If I then change it to include from BP INCLUDE BP GIVE.FEEDBACK it works fine. What am I doing wrong? --- 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/
