Search results

Thank you again. And yeah ... 'Adding/dropping/changing columns and tables, Adding/rebuilding/dropping indexes (no recompiling of code)', that would be dreamy for sure. The problem isn't so much that doing these things is tedious or expensive directly, but it leads to people doing all kinds of...

Getting back to the Lengths thing, I have a follow up question. Does anybody know what would be the implications of setting _width on every field to 32k (in our case, we don't have any LONGCHAR, etc. to worry about). This *sounds* like the worst idea ever, like every single field would get...

In your defense, I think you, like I, still have code from v6, where the editor was even more ghastly than today (it's where I learned the word 'ohnosecond', that's the moment between when your brain already sent your hand a signal to press f8 and the moment you realize that it's too late to...

Not sure what you mean by 'major maintenance' but for us it is certainly true that a lot of terrible, terrible things derive from the hassle of doing schema changes in Progress. If you could change schema the same way you can edit a .p, we would have avoided many atrocities. I know it's better...

That's exactly what I mean, and Andre's example is almost exactly what we put in all of our includes. So in our world a typical largish program begins with 10-20 lines of .i declarations. Another rule we have is that includes should be written and used in such a way that they never get used...

I think you can just say > "", rather than the AND, but I don't have Progress in front of me right now to double check. We have arguments sometimes over whether every field should be tagged mandatory in the schema. In principle I think the answer is Yes, but in reality, we don't do this and...

Ok, I'll bite. Doesn't everyone have a lock table? What's the alternative? Optional table level locking might be helpful? +1 for dirty reads, this seems so terrible... though in all honesty I have never seen an actual production problem caused by this.

Wow. What a superb reply. Thank you very, very much. Aside: it's just so crazy to me that SQL people think screwing around with field lengths is a good use of time. I like a great many things about SQL and Java, etc. over Progress, but this is one of two or three areas that Progress gets SO right.

I vaguely understand that whereas Progress fields are inherently variable length, in SQL, they're usually fixed length (unless you define them as VARCHAR, which is, I gather, uncommon). I further believe that if the actual length of a field exceeds the "SQL length", bad things happen. To avoid...

By the way, going back to the original post, 'it is not obvious where the included variables come from' is not an issue if you follow rules similar to ours. And 'may add unnecessary overhead' is, I think, totally false. Of course, IP's can add overhead, but (a) it's miniscule and (b) include...

We use include files extensively, and while we definitely do some terrible things with them, for the most part, I'm OK with it and absent starting down the OO road, I'd probably do it again. We have three rules that we follow: 1. Any .I must be independently compilable, that is, it must...

If you want to go down the parsing road ... I'd consider parsing .R. We do this in one situation and it works well (not sure I'd use it for a fly-by-wire system though). If you look at it with a binary editor, it's not very scary at all. It has the benefit that .R code is more likely to be...

I think GET-SIGNATURE is only useful for 'RUN x IN y', not a bare 'RUN x'. If this has changed in a recent OE, I'd love to know about that, we have invested untold hours in working around the limitation of not being able to run GET-SIGNATURE directly! If the OP wants to know about the (three)...

The Windows API is your friend for this kind of thing, and look, an article that answers this exact question: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/dd162826(v=vs.85).aspx Of course, you'd have to translate this from C++ into ABL.

Thanks for the feedback. Rob - you're right, I need to track that down. Tom - we have a policy against bugs, so of course it can't be that ;) Do you guys agree that this (an AppServer holding onto a record lock outside of the duration of a call to it) is only feasible with an uncleanedup...

Hello Progress World (mostly) 10.2B HPUX We have been running AppServers for eons, and we always run them StateFree (from WebClient) or StateLess (from Web Service proxies). We had a problem the other day where it appears (from log files) that one of our Web Services-supporting AppServers was...

We don't use Progress OOP, so I don't really know what I'm talking about. But I think the basic idea is that instead of 'METHOD PUBLIC HANDLE GetEmployeeList()' you could use 'DEFINE PUBLIC PROPERTY EmployeeList AS EmployeeListClass', where 'EmployeeListClass' is (basically) a class wrapper...

Would &FILE-NAME, &LINE-NUMBER help, eg. in the THROW statement? I have my doubts, and haven't used them myself. Your concern #1 about using callStack sounds not valid because you probably shouldn't be CATCHing errors very often. If you are, you probably have bigger problems. Eg., you generally...

Well, a lot of people would disagree with you (basically anyone under 30, and I say that as someone way on the wrong side of 30 myself), but more to the point, they're robbing themselves by making it so difficult to find these things out. Nobody knows who Progress is, and nobody cares, and this...

All three of these replies (especially Cringer's) must be a huge turn off to anyone considering Progress!