Mats Carlid wrote: > We started in Prine information in the early 80's and > used named common from day 1. > > Unnamed common was deemed to be too dangerous if/when > coexisting with another > application or general subroutines in the same > environment and thus _never_ used it - I tend to > forget that it exists.
Named common is a sort of double-edged sword and there are times when you DON'T want to use it. It's not entirely bad or good. In case anyone gets the bright idea to just put \label\ in front of all of their common, that's a very bad idea. Because named common survived the entire login session you may find yourself ending a program, coming into something completely different, but using old data. Or you may have an application login (kiosk?) where different people share the process but you certainly don't want them to carry user data around. As an example, for web apps I specifically remove the password from user records that get passed around the app, just in case some other code later exposes an old user, I don't want to open a password leak. Yes, for those familiar with this, for a multi-user app it might not be a good idea to carry any session state data in named common. That's the point, there are decisions to be made based on how the app is being used, and the only absolute might be to never store credit card numbers in named common. As with anything, the tools need to be used carefully and judiciously. Tony ------- u2-users mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
