...
> There should be a consistant set of rules for what is a 'valid'
> device class name and what will be accepted as a (potentially)
> valid LDEV number.

This seems perfectly reasonable, but I was involved many years
ago in cleaning up some of this code.  We enforced stricter
parsing rules specifically for DEV= and broke Netbase, which
embedded remote machine info into the DEV= parm.  We had to undo
our "fix".

Also, the FILE command is a mixed bag.  Most of the parameters
must exist on the system, but some don't need to.  For example,
  :file a=b
works fine even if B does not exist at the time the file equation
is created.  :FILE was not originally designed to be an LDEV checker
etc... but has been used very creatively by our customers for so many
years that there is a fair chance of breaking something if we alter
its parsing rules.

Just my opinion,
 Jeff Vance, CSY

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