[Info-vax] C99 updates to CRTL

[Hans Bachner]

Jan-Erik Söderholm schrieb am 30.07.2019 um 19:27:
> Den 2019-07-30 kl. 17:12, skrev Dave Froble:
>> On 7/30/2019 9:58 AM, Stephen Hoffman wrote:
>>> On 2019-07-29 17:50:54 +0000, John Reagan said:
>>>
>>>> On Monday, July 29, 2019 at 12:21:28 PM UTC-4, Stephen Hoffman wrote:
>>>>> On 2019-07-27 20:45:09 +0000, Simon Clubley said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Arne, are you _trying_ to trigger Stephen ? :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's bad enough using logicals to alter behaviour at runtime, but at
>>>>>> compile time as well ? :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> There's already at least one logical name around that effects the
>>>>> compile-time behavior.
>>>>>
>>>>> One existing logical name effects the compile-time resolution of the
>>>>> external references within the compiler.
>>>>
>>>> Do you have a reference?
>>>
>>> The DEC/Compaq/HP/HPE/VSI C compiler opens up the C RTL and searches it
>>> for a list of entry points, and that processing can be redirected by
>>> logical name.  I don't recall off-hand if it was the DECC$SHR logical
>>> name, or if some other was used.
>>>
>>> I've had a few occasions to do this redirection, but not in recent
>>> times. This redirection is most common when working cross-version,
>>> something which is somewhat unsupported.
>>>
>>> It wouldn't surprise me that there are other logical names latent and
>>> lurking in the compilation process.
>>>
>>> App management and configuration with logical names—other than for
>>> device redirection, and that usage is only marginally better than app
>>> config data—is among the more fetid coding practices and endemic on
>>> OpenVMS.
>>>
>>> Logical names as configuration data storage?  Hacks all the way down.
>>> Isolation by convention. Parsing by assumption.  Architecture by
>>> accretion. Documentation by omission.
>>>
>>> But I'm feeling polite today.  And yes, I have used logical names for
>>> configuration data. Having encountered better configuration data storage
>>> schemes else-platform, now usually whilst holding my nose, too.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> The "logical name" rant is usually interesting.  But, this time, I
>> wondered just how "guilty" I've been.  So I took a look.
>>
>> I use logical names to refer to mailbox names, which gives me a
>> defined name for something that will usually (always) have a unique
>> name each time the mailbox is set up.
>>
>> I use logical names to refer to devices, such as disk drives, the
>> printer LTA port, MODEM_PORT (old cruft no longer used), and such.
>>
>
> All those are perfectly valid uses of logical names. And one of the nice
> featurs as I see it, is that the applications doesn't have to "look up"
> the logical names, it just uses them, sicne the lookup is buiilt in in
> VMS runtime environment. If you have a configuration storage, such as
> some table in our database, you can just as well put "MBA1234:" there
> or (better) use a logical name. It doesn't matter for the application
> it can open both without having to lookup the logical name value first.
>
> I do not know of any better way to handle that, and the integrated logical
> name lookup that VMS offers beats anything else I have seen.
>
> Maybe just ignore the local name rants some enjoys to spread around?

+1.

>> [...]