RE: Compiling after file changes

[David FOXWELL <David.FOXWELL@xxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Message d'origine-----
> [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] De la part de Simon Coulter
>
>
> Well accepted standard in the OO world. Common as mud and 
> makes a lot of sense. Tell your management weenies that I 
> said they were a bunch of numptys and it's time they got with 
> the program.

My French won't go that far - a quick google translate :
Dites à votre saucisse de gestion que j'ai dit qu'ils étaient un groupe de numptys et il est temps qu'ils obtenu avec le programme.

"Management sausage" doesn't seem right somehow. Are they confusing Australian weenies with an American synonyme?

So, if a file had 100 fields, you'd probably just do getters for the ones you need and let the next person add a getter when it was needed? Management doesn't see the advantage of the getters for each zone and I'm trying to think of the reason.

> Yes, but you resolve that by including a level request as 
> part of the I/O interface so programs requesting level 1 get 
> a data structure that is how the record looks today, those 
> requesting tomorrow's level 2 will get a different structure 
> with new fields added (or old ones removed, or both), and so on.
 
Now even I am shocked. So the DS's would be hard coded? The procedure in the i/o module could not read directly into the DS. That and a level request seems to be a lot of unnecessary complexity to me.