Re: trigger program question

[CRPence <CRPbottle@xxxxxxxxx>]

  Exactly.  That it "has not happened" there is why I pointed out there 
were /assumptions/ that may not hold elsewhere; e.g. the assumption that 
no other program or user has effected CHGJRN JRNRCV(named|*GEN) since 
the last time the program ran.  As an assumption not explicitly informed 
of in the program source, opens the potential that another user of that 
source might encounter difficulties [and possibly not even know it].

  Since at least two individuals expressed interest in the approach, I 
took the time to point out obvious assumptions that the CLP source made; 
so that if adopted, they might prevent encountering mistakes rather than 
learning from them.  Although I had contemplated doing so before the 
other posts were made, I did not, good or bad, because I inferred the 
current usage was deemed acceptable within its operating environment.

Regards, Chuck

johnking@xxxxxxx wrote:
> <<SNIP>>
>
> I'm not sure that I understand your comment about potential problems
> with the way the program uses the 'CHGJRN JRNRCV()' command. Are you
> referring to the possibility of some external process triggering a
> CHGJRN that is never harvested by the auditing report? In our
> environment that has not happened in more than ten years, perhaps
> because we're a small shop and all programming requests are vetted by
> me. Note I'm not challenging your assertion - just pointing out that
> it hasn't happened here.