Re:
> I consider this to be a reasonable compromise between Stan's (and others')
> position that the CI should not allow users to set variables beginning with
> "HP" and the position of those who believe "it's *my* system and I should
> be able to set any variable I please".
>
> If we would all agree to check for the existence of an "HP" variable before
> setting it, then we'd never run into problems such as those that have been
> mentioned in this thread. Of course, that's a big "IF".
>

NOT AT ALL!  There is no compromise possible here!  Either you
prevent users from creating an HP...variable or you don't.  The reasons
presented *included* arguments that show that you could clearly run into
problems even if you first checked for the existence of an HP... variable!
(e.g., see the "HPAUTOCONTINUE" example, or the "HPTYPEAHED" example ...
both of which would have satisfied your "check for existence" rule, and
yet still screwed you up.)


If you want to use HP.... (e.g., HPYYYYMMDD) on a release that doesn't have
it, then use a *DIFFERENT* variable name:  YYYYMMDD or TODAY_YYYYMMDD (hey...
that's a better name, anyway :).  Then, set that variable from HPYYYYMMDD if
available, or through some other manner if it isn't available!


Stan Sieler                                           [log in to unmask]
www.allegro.com/sieler/wanted/index.html          www.allegro.com/sieler