Re: Will IBM ever expand system object names? -- MIDRANGE-L

Subject: Re: Will IBM ever expand system object names?
From: "James H. H. Lampert" <jamesl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 29 May 2024 11:07:29 -0700
List-archive: <https://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l/>
List-post: <mailto:midrange-l@lists.midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@lists.midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/options/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@lists.midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

On 5/29/24 10:42 AM, Brad Stone wrote:

I like it. :)

It's rather like what WinDoze did to support long names. Having a separate "long name" property is quite different from changing the length of the "name" property (QSYS.LIB objects do, after all, get new properties added from time to time), and it's probably the only way long names could be made to work without breaking enormous amounts of software.

--
JHHL

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow-Ups:

Re: Will IBM ever expand system object names? , Mark Waterbury

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2025 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.