[My apologies if this is a duplicate for some readers.  I had trouble last
week with some of my postings not making the jump through the gateway to
3000-L.]

When I learned IMAGE yea many years ago, I got the notion that the right way
to call DBGET and related procedures was with an explicit list parameter
specifying the particular items of interest.  If I was concerned with the
overhead of processing such a list, I could establish a "current list",
typically by doing a directed read to record 0 (which I knew would return
condition 12) and using "*;" in subsequent calls.  The theory was that, if
there were structural changes to the database, such as new items added to
the dataset, it would not be necessary to change and recompile any programs
that did not use the new items.

In practice, however, it seems as though everybody just uses "@;" all the
time.  The buffer layout gets put into a COPY library.  If items are added
or modified, you have to track down every program that uses that dataset
and, at a minimum, recompile it.  If you miss one, mysterious things happen,
as when the program's buffer becomes too short for the newly enlarged
dataset layout.

Am I correct in my belief, based on admittedly limited observation, that
practically everybody always uses an "@;" list?  If so, is there any good
reason for this?  Is "@;" faster than "*;"?  If so, why?  And is it enough
faster to justify the risk and inconvenience of having to recompile many
programs whenever a minor structural database change is made?  Or am I
missing something more significant?

Thanks.

Walter




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *