Impacts of modifying record structures

Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:05:05 -0700

This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C113C3.87884610
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

If all it is doing is counting the elements, you may want to make a few
extras to avoid this hassle in the future.

e.g. instead of a single FILLER length 10, make a FILLER length 5 and 5
more with a length of 1.

-----Original Message-----
From: Aikens, Curtis [mailto:CAikens@dairyworld.com]
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 2:27 PM
To: powerhouse
Subject: RE: Impacts of modifying record structures

Nope - it's the actual number of elements within the record structure that
has changed.   A recompilation is pretty well unavoidable, (as in I haven't
ever found a way around it).

If you find some other approach that works however, make sure you publicize
it.  There are a lot of us RMS-types who'd appreciate it!

Curtis Aikens 
Information Technologies 
Dairyland 
(780) 486-8442 

 -----Original Message----- 
From:   pablo grim [ mailto:pablow666@gorge.net <mailto:pablow666@gorge.net>
] 
Sent:   Monday, July 23, 2001 3:28 PM 
To:     Edis, Bob; powerhouse 
Subject:        Re: Impacts of modifying record structures 

The temp item has not changed. 

Calling screen: 

TEMP T-NEW-ENTRY         CHAR*1     RESET AT STARTUP INIT "N" 

Called screen: 

TEMP T-NEW-ENTRY     CHAR*1 

I should mention that I did NOT execute the UNLOAD/CREATE/RELOAD procedure 
on the affected record.  I don't usually do this unless the index structure 
or record length has changed. 

p 

> From: "Edis, Bob" <bob.edis@fleetpride.com> 
> Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:03:01 -0500 
> To: "'powerh-l@list.swau.edu'" <powerh-l@lists.swau.edu> 
> Subject: RE: Impacts of modifying record structures 
> 
> Has the definition for T-NEW-ENTRY changed?   How is it declared on each 
> screen? 
> 
> I assume the receiving screen was always a MENU screen. 
> 
> I tend to agree with a previous poster; you will have to recompile the 
> screens that reference this record. 
> 
> Blue 
> 
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: pablo grim [ mailto:pablow666@gorge.net <mailto:pablow666@gorge.net>
] 
> Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 3:54 PM 
> To: Edis, Bob; 'powerh-l@list.swau.edu' 
> Subject: Re: Impacts of modifying record structures 
> 
> 
> Sure.  Here's a typical example: 
> 
> 
> RUN SCREEN HRS_EXE:HRNK096.QKC MODE SAME PASSING EMPLOYEE-PER, T-NEW-ENTRY

> 
> SCREEN HRS_EXE:HRNK096.QKC  MENU RECEIVING EMPLOYEE-PER, T-NEW-ENTRY & 
> MESSAGE ON 24 
> 
> I tried the "substructure" approach on the record statement rather than 
> shortening the filler field, but I am still getting the same error
message. 
> 
> Here are the items in question after substructuring.  The country code
field 
> is the new item.  CLIENT-ELEMENT is the filler item: 
> 
> CLIENT-ELEMENT                       CHARACTER         40          295 
> ..FOREIGN-COUNTRY-CODE                CHARACTER          2          295 
> DATE-LONGEVITY-LAST                  INTEGER SIGNED     4          335 
> 
> The file is indexed sequential RMS. 
> 
> Is there some way I could do it with a REDEF?  I am playing around with
it, 
> but it increases the record length... 
> 
> tx 
> 
> p 
>> From: "Edis, Bob" <bob.edis@fleetpride.com> 
>> Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:54:00 -0500 
>> To: "'powerh-l@list.swau.edu'" <powerh-l@lists.swau.edu> 
>> Subject: RE: Impacts of modifying record structures 
>> 
>> Pablo 
>> 
>> Can we see the subscreen/run screen statements from the calling screen
and 
>> the screen statement from the receiving screen please? 
>> 
>> Regards, 
>> Blue 
>> 
>> -----Original Message----- 
>> From: pablo grim [ mailto:pablow666@gorge.net
<mailto:pablow666@gorge.net> ] 
>> Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 2:42 PM 
>> To: powerhouse 
>> Subject: Impacts of modifying record structures 
>> 
>> 
>> Howdy folks, 
>> 
>> Ok, I have a record structure called EMPLOYEE-PER that is used in about a

>> zillion programs.  The record structure includes "filler" fields for 
> future 
>> expansion.  This is handy to avoid having to recompile everything when 
>> adding a new item to the record structure.  Simply take some bytes from 
> the 
>> filler and use them for the new item.  Therefore, the record length stays

>> the same.  I'm sure most of you have done something similar. 
>> 
>> Well, I did this, but I'm getting the error: 
>> 
>> *d* The screen linkage parameters don't agree with local definitions. 
>> 
>> when I call a subscreen passing the EMPLOYEE-PER record.  This is 
>> disappointing as it looks like I will have to recompile every subscreen 
> that 
>> receives this record structure as a parameter (a very significant task). 
> I 
>> don't remember this happening before when using this old tried and true 
>> technique for avoiding recompiles.  Is this something new? 
>> 
>> Does anybody have any suggestions for modifying my record structure 
> without 
>> having to recompile?  All I am trying to do is add a new 2 character
field 
>> to the record.  The "filler" field that I have shortened is not a 
> parameter 
>> being passed to the subscreens. 
>> 
>> VMS 7.1 
>> PH    7.10 
>> RMS files 
>> 
>> thanks! 
>> 
>> p 
>> 
>> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
>> Mailing list: powerh-l@lists.swau.edu 
>> Subscribe: "subscribe" in message body to powerh-l-request@lists.swau.edu

>> Unsubscribe: "unsubscribe" in message body to 
>> powerh-l-request@lists.swau.edu 
>> http://lists.swau.edu/mailman/listinfo/powerh-l
<http://lists.swau.edu/mailman/listinfo/powerh-l>  
>> This list is closed, thus to post to the list you must be a subscriber. 
>> 
>> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
>> Mailing list: powerh-l@lists.swau.edu 
>> Subscribe: "subscribe" in message body to powerh-l-request@lists.swau.edu

>> Unsubscribe: "unsubscribe" in message body to 
> powerh-l-request@lists.swau.edu 
>> http://lists.swau.edu/mailman/listinfo/powerh-l
<http://lists.swau.edu/mailman/listinfo/powerh-l>  
>> This list is closed, thus to post to the list you must be a subscriber. 
> 
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
> Mailing list: powerh-l@lists.swau.edu 
> Subscribe: "subscribe" in message body to powerh-l-request@lists.swau.edu 
> Unsubscribe: "unsubscribe" in message body to
powerh-l-request@lists.swau.edu 
> http://lists.swau.edu/mailman/listinfo/powerh-l
<http://lists.swau.edu/mailman/listinfo/powerh-l>  
> This list is closed, thus to post to the list you must be a subscriber. 

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
Mailing list: powerh-l@lists.swau.edu 
Subscribe: "subscribe" in message body to powerh-l-request@lists.swau.edu 
Unsubscribe: "unsubscribe" in message body to
powerh-l-request@lists.swau.edu 
http://lists.swau.edu/mailman/listinfo/powerh-l
<http://lists.swau.edu/mailman/listinfo/powerh-l>  
This list is closed, thus to post to the list you must be a subscriber. 

------_=_NextPart_001_01C113C3.87884610
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<TITLE>RE: Impacts of modifying record structures</TITLE>

<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2920.0" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV>If all 
it is doing is counting the elements, you may want to make a 
few</DIV>
<DIV>extras 
to avoid this hassle in the future.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>e.g. 
instead of a single FILLER length 10, make a FILLER length 5 and 
5</DIV>
<DIV>more 
with a length of 1.</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE 
style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
 <DIV align=left class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr>-----Original Message----- From: Aikens, Curtis 
 [mailto:CAikens@dairyworld.com] Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 2:27 
 PM To: powerhouse Subject: RE: Impacts of modifying record 
 structures </DIV>
 Nope - it's the actual number of elements within the record 
 structure that has changed.&nbsp;&nbsp; A recompilation is pretty well 
 unavoidable, (as in I haven't ever found a way around it).
 If you find some other approach that works however, make sure 
 you publicize it.&nbsp; There are a lot of us RMS-types who'd appreciate 
 it! 
 Curtis Aikens Information 
 Technologies Dairyland (780) 
 486-8442 
 &nbsp;-----Original Message----- From: 
 &nbsp; pablo grim [<A 
 href="mailto:pablow666@gorge.net">mailto:pablow666@gorge.net</A>] 
 Sent:&nbsp;&nbsp; Monday, July 23, 2001 3:28 PM 
 To:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Edis, Bob; powerhouse 
 Subject:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Re: 
 Impacts of modifying record structures 
 The temp item has not changed. 
 Calling screen: 
 TEMP 
 T-NEW-ENTRY&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 CHAR*1&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; RESET AT STARTUP INIT "N" 
 Called screen: 
 TEMP T-NEW-ENTRY&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; CHAR*1 
 I should mention that I did NOT execute the 
 UNLOAD/CREATE/RELOAD procedure on the affected 
 record.&nbsp; I don't usually do this unless the index structure 
 or record length has changed. 
 p 
 &gt; From: "Edis, Bob" &lt;bob.edis@fleetpride.com&gt; 
 &gt; Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:03:01 -0500 &gt; To: "'powerh-l@list.swau.edu'" 
 &lt;powerh-l@lists.swau.edu&gt; &gt; Subject: RE: 
 Impacts of modifying record structures &gt; 
 &gt; Has the definition for T-NEW-ENTRY 
 changed?&nbsp;&nbsp; How is it declared on each &gt; 
 screen? &gt; &gt; I assume the 
 receiving screen was always a MENU screen. &gt; 
 &gt; I tend to agree with a previous poster; you will 
 have to recompile the &gt; screens that reference this 
 record. &gt; &gt; Blue 
 &gt; &gt; -----Original 
 Message----- &gt; From: pablo grim [<A 
 href="mailto:pablow666@gorge.net">mailto:pablow666@gorge.net</A>] 
 &gt; Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 3:54 PM &gt; To: Edis, Bob; 'powerh-l@list.swau.edu' &gt; Subject: Re: Impacts of modifying record structures 
 &gt; &gt; &gt; Sure.&nbsp; Here's a typical example: &gt; 
 &gt; &gt; RUN SCREEN 
 HRS_EXE:HRNK096.QKC MODE SAME PASSING EMPLOYEE-PER, T-NEW-ENTRY 
 &gt; &gt; SCREEN 
 HRS_EXE:HRNK096.QKC&nbsp; MENU RECEIVING EMPLOYEE-PER, T-NEW-ENTRY 
 &amp; &gt; MESSAGE ON 24 &gt; 
 &gt; I tried the "substructure" approach on the record 
 statement rather than &gt; shortening the filler 
 field, but I am still getting the same error message. &gt; &gt; Here are the items in question after 
 substructuring.&nbsp; The country code field &gt; is 
 the new item.&nbsp; CLIENT-ELEMENT is the filler item: &gt; &gt; 
 CLIENT-ELEMENT&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 CHARACTER&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 40&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 295 &gt; 
 ..FOREIGN-COUNTRY-CODE&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 CHARACTER&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 2&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 295 &gt; 
 DATE-LONGEVITY-LAST&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 INTEGER SIGNED&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 4&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 335 &gt; &gt; The file is indexed sequential 
 RMS. &gt; &gt; Is there some 
 way I could do it with a REDEF?&nbsp; I am playing around with it, 
 &gt; but it increases the record length... &gt; &gt; tx &gt; 
 &gt; p &gt;&gt; From: "Edis, 
 Bob" &lt;bob.edis@fleetpride.com&gt; &gt;&gt; Date: 
 Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:54:00 -0500 &gt;&gt; To: 
 "'powerh-l@list.swau.edu'" &lt;powerh-l@lists.swau.edu&gt; &gt;&gt; Subject: RE: Impacts of modifying record structures 
 &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Pablo 
 &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Can we see the 
 subscreen/run screen statements from the calling screen and &gt;&gt; the screen statement from the receiving screen please? 
 &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Regards, 
 &gt;&gt; Blue &gt;&gt; 
 &gt;&gt; -----Original Message----- &gt;&gt; From: pablo grim [<A 
 href="mailto:pablow666@gorge.net">mailto:pablow666@gorge.net</A>] 
 &gt;&gt; Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 2:42 PM &gt;&gt; To: powerhouse &gt;&gt; Subject: 
 Impacts of modifying record structures &gt;&gt; 
 &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Howdy 
 folks, &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Ok, I 
 have a record structure called EMPLOYEE-PER that is used in about a 
 &gt;&gt; zillion programs.&nbsp; The record structure 
 includes "filler" fields for &gt; future 
 &gt;&gt; expansion.&nbsp; This is handy to avoid having to 
 recompile everything when &gt;&gt; adding a new item 
 to the record structure.&nbsp; Simply take some bytes from &gt; the &gt;&gt; filler and use them for the 
 new item.&nbsp; Therefore, the record length stays &gt;&gt; the same.&nbsp; I'm sure most of you have done something 
 similar. &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; 
 Well, I did this, but I'm getting the error: &gt;&gt; 
 &gt;&gt; *d* The screen linkage parameters don't agree 
 with local definitions. &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; when I call a subscreen passing the EMPLOYEE-PER record.&nbsp; 
 This is &gt;&gt; disappointing as it looks like I will 
 have to recompile every subscreen &gt; that 
 &gt;&gt; receives this record structure as a parameter (a 
 very significant task). &gt; I &gt;&gt; don't remember this happening before when using this old tried 
 and true &gt;&gt; technique for avoiding 
 recompiles.&nbsp; Is this something new? &gt;&gt; 
 &gt;&gt; Does anybody have any suggestions for 
 modifying my record structure &gt; without 
 &gt;&gt; having to recompile?&nbsp; All I am trying to do is 
 add a new 2 character field &gt;&gt; to the 
 record.&nbsp; The "filler" field that I have shortened is not a 
 &gt; parameter &gt;&gt; being passed 
 to the subscreens. &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; VMS 7.1 &gt;&gt; PH&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 7.10 &gt;&gt; RMS files &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; thanks! &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; p &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
 = = = = = = = = = = = = = &gt;&gt; Mailing list: 
 powerh-l@lists.swau.edu &gt;&gt; Subscribe: 
 "subscribe" in message body to powerh-l-request@lists.swau.edu 
 &gt;&gt; Unsubscribe: "unsubscribe" in message body to 
 &gt;&gt; powerh-l-request@lists.swau.edu &gt;&gt; <A href="http://lists.swau.edu/mailman/listinfo/powerh-l" 
 target=_blank>http://lists.swau.edu/mailman/listinfo/powerh-l</A> 
 &gt;&gt; This list is closed, thus to post to the list you 
 must be a subscriber. &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
 &gt;&gt; Mailing list: powerh-l@lists.swau.edu 
 &gt;&gt; Subscribe: "subscribe" in message body to 
 powerh-l-request@lists.swau.edu &gt;&gt; Unsubscribe: 
 "unsubscribe" in message body to &gt; 
 powerh-l-request@lists.swau.edu &gt;&gt; <A 
 href="http://lists.swau.edu/mailman/listinfo/powerh-l" 
 target=_blank>http://lists.swau.edu/mailman/listinfo/powerh-l</A> 
 &gt;&gt; This list is closed, thus to post to the list you 
 must be a subscriber. &gt; &gt; = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
 &gt; Mailing list: powerh-l@lists.swau.edu &gt; Subscribe: "subscribe" in message body to 
 powerh-l-request@lists.swau.edu &gt; Unsubscribe: 
 "unsubscribe" in message body to powerh-l-request@lists.swau.edu 
 &gt; <A 
 href="http://lists.swau.edu/mailman/listinfo/powerh-l" 
 target=_blank>http://lists.swau.edu/mailman/listinfo/powerh-l</A> 
 &gt; This list is closed, thus to post to the list you must 
 be a subscriber. 
 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
 Mailing list: powerh-l@lists.swau.edu Subscribe: "subscribe" in message body to 
 powerh-l-request@lists.swau.edu Unsubscribe: 
 "unsubscribe" in message body to powerh-l-request@lists.swau.edu 
 <A href="http://lists.swau.edu/mailman/listinfo/powerh-l" 
 target=_blank>http://lists.swau.edu/mailman/listinfo/powerh-l</A> 
 This list is closed, thus to post to the list you must be a 
 subscriber. </BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------_=_NextPart_001_01C113C3.87884610--