I agree with you on all points.  The local (same file) subroutine 
implementation in 11.2 is not quite as ambitious as I would like; but, it also 
did not go down any particularly verbose byway.  Having the capability to 
easily replace some "gosub" structures with subroutines & functions is huge, 
however, imho.  (It would be nice if the DEFFUN was assumed for internal 

I think classes and instances are very desirable, but I can appreciate that it 
would probably provoke a major review of Uv's garbage collection mechanism, 
which would make it a difficult sale.  Also, have pity for the support staff 
that would need to support the crowd of Basic programmers during the transition!


-----Original Message-----
[] On Behalf Of Brian Leach
Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 4:58 AM
To: 'U2 Users List'
Subject: Re: [U2] Recommended 11.1.point release to upgrade to.


That approach is understandable in offering a backwardly compatible solution
but I wish they had been a bit braver with it..

If they had looked at what OpenQM did with creating a more class-oriented
structure in their version of basic, which makes for better surfacing of
methods (especially with my unit testing hat on), that would potentially
have offered a lot more options. I'm guessing it's the same low-impact
mindset that stopped them from doing UDO's as first class citizens of the
language, instead hiding them behind an ugly function library that obscures
the structure (which is surely the whole point of JSON style objects?)


-----Original Message-----
[] On Behalf Of Rick Nuckolls
Sent: 25 September 2013 00:16
To: 'U2 Users List'
Subject: Re: [U2] Recommended 11.1.point release to upgrade to.


I agree that they took a simple (but fine) route on the local scoping.  What
is funny is that the interpretation of it seems to be that it allows the
overriding of the production version of subroutines rather than simply
creation of a "safe" version of gosub.  It should work for both; I just
never pictured it that way.

Be sure to read the install notes on 11, in particular, the "NUSERS" config
item is new & important.  Fixtool finally seems to work well.  I know that a
lot of work has gone into that over the previous couple of years.


-----Original Message-----
[] On Behalf Of Charles Stevenson
Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 3:53 PM
To: U2 Users List
Subject: Re: [U2] Recommended 11.1.point release to upgrade to.

Thanks, Rick.

They're finally getting in your desired variable scoping into 11.2, too.
>From what I read, I like how they did it.

My prejudice against being an early adopter of major releases kicks in & 
makes me not want 11.2.0.   11.2.4 maybe.  Also, if I wait until 
November, my window closes.

The vast majority of the issues listed in the 11.1 release notes have to do
with stuff we don't use at all (DR, DARE, MQ, etc), or use so minimally that
complete regression testing is easy (XML, callHTTP, etc.)

There were several issues having to do with indexing.   I think if I 
validate the indexes after regression tests, that should suffice.

Issues that involve locking are trickier.  It will require load testing and
lock contention.
I am not looking forward to that.

The only time in my whole career that I recall having any problem with
backward compatibility after a UV upgrade is also the only time I've seen a
day's worth of work for an entire company abandoned and the previous night's
backups restored.  There was an undocumented change to 
FMT  was made that ended up truncating out data, if I recall.   It's in 
the U2-list archives.  Some of the same people who suffered through that are
with me now.


On 9/25/2013 12:53 AM, Rick Nuckolls wrote:
> Chuck,
> We currently have one machine running 11.1.12 with no real problems.
11.1.13 is basically a one, only-on-severe-load, bug fix, and even then,
> There is at least one thing that I am expecting in 11.2 that is worth
waiting for, assuming it shows up.  I did not see it in the public beta. I
think that 11.2 is supposed to be out around Nov 1.
> -Rick
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
[] On Behalf Of Charles Stevenson
> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 2:28 PM
> To: U2 Users List
> Subject: [U2] Recommended 11.1.point release to upgrade to.
> We're finally going to upgrade from 10.2.10 to 11.1.[something].
> But which point release?
> We're on Win2003.  (Linux next year.  Baby steps.)
> Release    Date               Issues
> 11.1.13   Sept 2013         3     brand new.
> 11.1.12   June 2013        38      rescinded
> 11.1.11   Mar 2013        30     Metadata Manager  introduced.
> 11.1.10   Dec 2012         66
> 11.1.9     May2012         75
> 11.1.8     ?                          2
> 11.1.7    Dec 2011             3
> 11.1.6    ?                           4
> 11.1.5    Nov 2011          42
> 11.1.4    Aug 2011          17
> 11.1.3    Jun 2011           17
> 11.1.2    May 2011         29
> 11.1.1    Feb  2011          45
> 11.1.0    ?                         23
> I generally tend to not be an early adopter when the major release first
> comes out unless it has a new functionality that I have a strong
> business need for.
> The later point releases tend to be bug fixes, so I am more prone to get
> them sooner rather than wait.
> In this case though, we have new functionality, Metadata Manager,
> introduced at 11.1.11.
> Are many users on 11.1.11?  Happy?
> If i understand correctly, 11.1.12 was pulled off the market because of
> a bug that was fixed in 11.1.13, which just came out.  So not much
> experience in the wild with these 2.
> Which one  did / would  you choose to upgrade to 11.1?
> Chuck Stevenson
> _______________________________________________
> U2-Users mailing list
> _______________________________________________
> U2-Users mailing list

U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users mailing list

U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users mailing list

Reply via email to