IBM Power Ideas Portal
This portal is to open public enhancement requests against IBM Power Systems products, including IBM i. To view all of your ideas submitted to IBM, create and manage groups of Ideas, or create an idea explicitly set to be either visible by all (public) or visible only to you and IBM (private), use the IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com).
Shape the future of IBM!
We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:
Search existing ideas
Start by searching and reviewing ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted, and add a comment, vote, or subscribe to updates on them if they matter to you. If you can't find what you are looking for,
Post your ideas
Post an idea.
Get feedback from the IBM team and other customers to refine your idea.
Follow the idea through the IBM Ideas process.
Specific links you will want to bookmark for future use
Welcome to the IBM Ideas Portal (https://www.ibm.com/ideas) - Use this site to find out additional information and details about the IBM Ideas process and statuses.
IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com) - Use this site to view all of your ideas, create new ideas for any IBM product, or search for ideas across all of IBM.
ideasibm@us.ibm.com - Use this email to suggest enhancements to the Ideas process or request help from IBM for submitting your Ideas.
This feature was delivered in RDi 9.6.0.6, please see the fix list https://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg27038481#9606 for more detailed info.
Due to processing by IBM, this request was reassigned to have the following updated attributes:
Brand - Servers and Systems Software
Product family - Programming Languages
Product - Developer for Power Systems
For recording keeping, the previous attributes were:
Brand - Rational
Product family - Design & development
Product - Developer for Power Systems
Although the theme of this request is consistent with our business strategy, it is not committed to the release that is currently under development.
A preliminary evaluation of this request indicates that it is consistent with our business strategy. Further evaluation of this RFE is underway.
Michael's use case of CRTCMD - that one does not have the OPTION parameter - that would not be part of your development, I believe - anyhow, that means no *EVENTF, so no error messages returned.
In addition, this seems to be a case of things behaving differently between PDM and RDi - expectations are changed without obvious need - so I would like the reporting results of compile actions to be the same between development environments.
I've got a couple additional cases-- one which I just now encountered.
1) Compiling a CL program (although COBOL or RPG would probably have the same issue) with USRPRF(*OWNER). The program already exists and the compile includes REPLACE(*YES). But the program is owned by another user profile. When the compile successfully completes, no errors are shown but the existing program cannot be replaced because my profile isn't authorized to the profile under which the program was originally compiled
The error list doesn't report this condition. Once again, this takes looking through the job lob..
2) Our compile processing job deletes the spoolfiles from previous compiles. Under PDM, it only deletes the spoolfiles of compiles from the specific source member being processed. But with the job names all the same, the joblogs from all jobs with the same job name are deleted.
I can think of three points where find the job would be helpful: 1) Compiling objects which don't produce an error list; 2) Binding errors; and 3) Compile supportive programming. I'll expound/explain these below:
--------------------
1) CRTCMD doesn't return an error list.
CREATE TABLE DDL or CREATE FUNCTION/PRODUCEDURE DML statements do not produce an error list. (Our change management system handles DDL/DML for tables, views, functions, procedures, et al to be handled as a compile function.)
--------------------
2) I've attached a zip-file with screen shots and part of compile listing to illustrate this. When compiling RPG or COBOL and the binding directory is incorrectly specified (or missing), the compile shows nothing which should prevent the object from compiling,but states the compile failed. It takes scanning the job log to find the 'Definition not found for symbol...' error. From that you have to understand the compiler is telling you it can't find a procedure you're trying to bind into the program. In the zip-file
1: The error list shows only level-20 errors--nothing severe enough to stop the compile.
2: The compile listing confirms this.
3: Buried in the joblog, is a 'Definition not found...' message.
I've gotten pretty good a getting this and can easily navigate to the right compile job via the Job Status view. But if I'm remotely helping another developer who is not in my office, it is more challenging to find the right compile job.
--------------------
3) Our change management system wraps the CRTxxx commands in a program that can do a lot of other processing. If there's an error in this processing, the joblog generally needs to be reviewed. Finding the right joblog, would be much easier if it was named after the specific compile that was submitted.
These are just 3 examples I can think of off the top of my head. I'm certain I can document more if you need it.
We are not clear on what scenarios would require knowing the exact job name that is used compile members. The compile errors should automatically be pulled back into the IDE. Could you please tell us is there another scenario where the job name is required?