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