Re: Adoption of RPG OA (Summary)

[Vern Hamberg <vhamberg@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Yep, that's clear - and that's what I realized after reading your post - 
in another part of my reply I think I said that a handler could be a 
trojan horse - it can do anything a called program can.

So there's a risk, just the same as you describe here. Hey, would either 
of use let Leif Svalgaard put a handler OR a program on our machines? 
:-)   No offense to Leif - we think he's trustworthy.

I'm glad you raised this issue - it hasn't really been mentioned much, 
if at all, and it needs to be considered.

Vern

On 3/20/2011 9:06 PM, Joe Pluta wrote:
> On 3/20/2011 8:25 PM, Vern Hamberg wrote:
> > As to side effects - actually, the RPG engine is protecting you pretty
> > well there, I believe. All the handler does is set some values that the
> > RPG engine uses.
> I don't think I was explaining myself very well.  A CHAIN can only do
> one thing - read the database.  It cannot affect anything else.  Without
> a trigger or a handler, a CHAIN can never affect anything else.  Thus,
> if I need to debug a situation where a file is getting updated, I don't
> have to worry about any program that only CHAINs to files... until I
> start adding handlers.  Because now, every program that CHAINs to a file
> that has a handler can now potentially be updating anything, because now
> it is in effect calling another program.  Suddenly my analysis of what
> used to be a read-only program now changes to having to check the
> handler as well.
>
> That's not necessarily horrible, and I have to do the same thing for
> program calls, but at least with a CALL I know it's a CALL!  With a
> handler, I have to check the F-spec to make sure it doesn't have a
> handler attached.
>
> Minor, sure, but one more thing to check.  Is that a little clearer?
>
> Joe