Hi Again
I did of course mean the strings to be 'q' and "q" to cover double and
single quote usage as Q and q will pick up on D3. Unfortunately one needs
to be explicit for 'q' "q" 'Q' "Q" in other flavours.
Peter McMurray
"Peter McMurray" <excalibur21@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:AGZak.16705$IK1.5823@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Hi Chris
> D3 works fine on XP and does not require a lot of grunt if you
definitely
> want separation. I run my main system on my central machine and my demo
> system on a laptop. I just set up two users in the terminal emulator on
> the laptop and run them one local and one over the network with no
> conflicts even though they share the same printers. The printer issue
is
> not a problem because D3 uses the local share name on the machine that
it
> is running on.
> I think that most of us would just run a separate account on the main
> machine in your cir***stance. The number of Q pointers is not really an
> issue as one would simply run a small program (20 lines including
comments
> I guess) to set them using a source list. It is very easy to analyse
> them, simply SORT MD WITH A1 "Q" BY A2 BY A3 A2 A3 you should be able
to
> exclude any pointing to DM but caution.
> As for the issue of finding programs that could create them on the fly.
> No Problem as you have the source code.Presuming it is in BP then
> FIND
> source file BP
> String "q"
> string "Q"
> List Name GOTCHA
> Good Luck
> Peter McMurray
>
>
> "Chris A. Kusmierz" <ckusmierz@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:ioWak.195$9W.143@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> I've been lurking around CDP since March 2002, which was my first
>> exposure to PICK. I'm now one year into a new position which in part
>> entails maintaining a ~20 yr old PICK application. Our current system
>> runs on a D3/NT box running W2K. The best I can gather is that it was
>> migrated from an R83 system. Apparently the original VAR is long gone,
as
>> is all the former employees who worked for them and would consult over
>> the last several years.
>>
>> I've managed to hold my own over the last year, mainly doing modest
>> programming changes relating to data entry screens, re****t formatting,
>> adding printers, etc...But the company is growing and I see no need to
>> replace what works just because it isn't mainstream.
>>
>> So I have a head full of ideas for tweaking and expanding on the
current
>> system. However, my experience with our local Raining Data vendor (yes,
>> we are current on our sup****t contract) has run hot and cold. I
>> understand the difference between maintaining an application versus
>> sup****ting a platform. I can sup****t the application (I have the source
>> code) but I find myself in need of way to test things without affecting
>> the real data and system, since there's no easy recovery if I screw up.
>>
>> What I would like to do is create a test environment where I could try
>> new things without compromising the existing application/data. My first
>> thought was to do an account-restore to a seperate account and use that
>> account to experiment. But on further review I see alot of Q pointers
>> which cross accounts, and analyzing and mapping these cross accounts
>> seems a bit of work.
>>
>> So, my question is; Is there a way to run a type of virtual machine on
a
>> windows box which would allow me to bring the entire PICK system into
>> said machine and experiment with programming changes?
>>
>> I'm not necessarily looking for a free solution (thought it would be
>> nice) but I am looking for the most cost effective solution. I don't
>> believe the platform I'm seeking would need to totally mimic the D3/NT
>> enviornment (such as printer/file sup****t) but it would need to run the
>> existing PICK code.
>>
>> Management is starting to make noises about shopping for an SAP system
or
>> suchandwhat, and I don't think we need to fix what ain't broke. Quite
>> frankly, I'd rather put lipstick on a pig than re-invent the wheel so
to
>> speak[1]
>>
>> Chris A. Kusmierz
>>
>> [1] Please don't flame away as if this is an insult to MV apps or
>> platforms. Check the context.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
|
