Jeff writes:
...
> Yes, yes!  I would prefer "implied run" to take an "anyparm" of the
> remainder of the command line and supply it as info.  More programs
...
 
> Excellent suggestion Guy, but I doubt it's in the cards since that will
> break existing functionality (hey -- an HPvariable to decide which of
 
Actually, very few scripts/UDCs/command files will break...only those
that pass a PARM value into a program (assuming that a changed implementation
would treat:  'foo "a b c"' the same as if 'foo a b c' had been entered (i.e.,
that the quotes are optional)).
 
Still, I agree with Jeff...control the action via an HP variable.
Although, I think I'd prefer the variable to default to the *new* action,
even though this isn't backwards compatible ... why?  Because the new
action is *far* more useful than the old.  It reminds me of the argument
about the "OLDDATE" keyword on the RESTORE command.  I wanted to make it the
default, but was told that it wouldn't be backwards compatible ... so,
now we all use it on every single !@#$%^ RESTORE command!  (well, at
least I use it!)
 
The "pass everything to implied RUN's INFO" is precisely what I
lobbied for, before MPE XL 1.0 was released.
 
My summary:
   It's a good idea, and worth being backwards-incompatible.
 
Thanks, Guy & Jeff!
 
Stan Sieler                                          [log in to unmask]
                                     http://www.allegro.com/sieler.html