[This note has been sent to the following InterNet address(es): HP3000-L @ UTCVM.UTC.EDU it has also been sent to the following JP Morgan address(es) : To : SSWPROD.OAS @ TRSSW ] Jeff Vance <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >I have made a change to the Express II release of 5.0 (this is the >1st express release after the final 5.0 push and is planned to be >available in April): command files will have to be ASCII to be >executed. Today a binary command file can be executed. The other >conditions still apply: eof >0 and file code in [0..1023]. > >Will the ASCII requirement break any applications, jobs, scripts, etc.?? <stuff deleted> Larry Boyd wrote : >It seems that any attempt to solve this "problem" will cause at least some- >one problems. This solution maybe what is the best for all, however, I >believe there will be several who will find command files failing because >they are binary. > >I have an additionally suggestion. What if HP selected a filecode that >would define command files? If the file is ASCII it would still work, and >if the file is binary, the code could be checked. >The primary reason for the suggestion is that I've always thought that >command files and UDCs should have filecodes. It makes it very easy to >look at files with listf or MPEX and "see" if they are UDCs or command >files. <stuff deleted> Call me old fashioned, but I cannot see why anyone would want to use a binary command file. Can anyone take half a minute to enlighten me ? I also agree with Larry Boyd that a dedicated filecode for these types of files would be very desirable. John Dunlop ([log in to unmask])