Unconfigured Ad Widget

**Guest.Visitor** · 08-26-1998, 09:20 AM

MONMSG

On Wednesday, August 26, 1998, 08:25 AM, William Moore wrote: I have a CL that does two copy files (CPYF). The from file is always the same. CPYF . . . CPYF . . . If the first cpyf fails I want to execute a program, if the second cpyf fails I want to execute a different program. My question is can I check for the same CPF error (CPF2817) in two separate areas of the same CL and have each branch to a different area of the CL? Willie, If I remember correctly, each MonMsg command when placed directly after the command you are trying to monitor acts independently of other MONMSG commands provided you do not have one defined globally. For instance you would code: CPYF MONMSG(run PGMA). . . CPYF MONMSG(do pgmb). Just trying to keep up....

**daly.michael@verizon.net** · 08-26-1998, 09:22 AM

MONMSG

Willie, To monitor errors for a specific command within a procedure, the MONMSG command is coded on the line immediately following the command you wish to monitor. Therefore, your example would look like this:

 CPYF ...... MONMSG CPF2817 GOTO(FirstErr) ... CPYF ...... MONMSG CPF2817 GOTO(SecondErr) ...FirstErr: RCVMSG ..... ...SecondErr: RETURN .....

Of course, I don't know what you want to do when the errors occur, so I just made up something for the example. But, as you can see, there is a way to do exactly what you want. (How rare!) One day, we'll all be heroes.

**Guest.Visitor** · 08-26-1998, 09:23 AM

MONMSG

On Wednesday, August 26, 1998, 08:25 AM, William Moore wrote: I have a CL that does two copy files (CPYF). The from file is always the same. CPYF . . . CPYF . . . If the first cpyf fails I want to execute a program, if the second cpyf fails I want to execute a different program. My question is can I check for the same CPF error (CPF2817) in two separate areas of the same CL and have each branch to a different area of the CL? Willie, If I remember correctly, each MonMsg command when placed directly after the command you are trying to monitor acts independently of other MONMSG commands provided you do not have one defined globally. For instance you would code: CPYF MONMSG(run PGMA). . . CPYF MONMSG(do pgmb). Just trying to keep up....

**daly.michael@verizon.net** · 08-26-1998, 10:22 AM

MONMSG

On Wednesday, August 26, 1998, 09:25 AM, Jeff Importico wrote: Willie, If I remember correctly, each MonMsg command when placed directly after the command you are trying to monitor acts independently of other MONMSG commands provided you do not have one defined globally. For instance you would code: In truth, Command-level AND procedure-level error monitoring are very effective when used together within a procedure. Command-level monitoring has first priority, followed by any procedure-level monitoring. In other words, is an error is encountered, a MONMSG following the command causing the error will be used first. If there is no command-level monitoring, the procedure-level MONMSG is used. One day, we'll all be heroes.

**Guest.Visitor** · 08-26-1998, 10:49 AM

MONMSG

People, Whilst I am thrilled by the number of people helping Willie out, let us learn something from the number of duplicate answers. When you see a question that you have the answer for, look at the number of responses to this question. It is up there and if it says anything other than 1/1, take a look at the next responses to see if the question has already been answered. Another helpful hint is that if the system "acts funny" while trying to post your answer, and you think you need to post again, remember to scan down to the question you answered in that forum and check to see if the first answer may actually have taken. If so, go into either one of them and hit the delete option. Bill

**daly.michael@verizon.net** · 08-26-1998, 11:43 AM

MONMSG

On Wednesday, August 26, 1998, 10:49 AM, Bill Robins wrote: People, Whilst I am thrilled by the number of people helping Willie out, let us learn something from the number of duplicate answers. When you see a question that you have the answer for, look at the number of responses to this question. It is up there and if it says anything other than 1/1, take a look at the next responses to see if the question has already been answered. If you will notice the timing of our responses, we all saw the initial posting a essentially the same time. We all saw the number of responses to this question as 1/1. We were all writing our responses at the same time. Another helpful hint is that if the system "acts funny" while trying to post your answer, and you think you need to post again, remember to scan down to the question you answered in that forum and check to see if the first answer may actually have taken. If so, go into either one of them and hit the delete option. Bill [/i] Unless you are the new Webmaster, what business it is of yours? What gives you the right to criticize Jeff for multiple postings? Mind your own damn business. Michael One day, we'll all be heroes.

**Guest.Visitor** · 08-26-1998, 12:15 PM

MONMSG

On Wednesday, August 26, 1998, 11:43 AM, Michael Daly wrote: On Wednesday, August 26, 1998, 10:49 AM, Bill Robins wrote: People,Key word here... Whilst I am thrilled by the number of people helping Willie out, let us learn something from the number of duplicate answers. When you see a question that you have the answer for, look at the number of responses to this question. It is up there and if it says anything other than 1/1, take a look at the next responses to see if the question has already been answered. If you will notice the timing of our responses, we all saw the initial posting a essentially the same time. We all saw the number of responses to this question as 1/1. We were all writing our responses at the same time. Another helpful hint is that if the system "acts funny" while trying to post your answer, and you think you need to post again, remember to scan down to the question you answered in that forum and check to see if the first answer may actually have taken. If so, go into either one of them and hit the delete option. Bill Unless you are the new Webmaster, what business it is of yours? What gives you the right to criticize Jeff for multiple postings? Mind your own damn business. Michael

Well Bill you're right I got so po'd that my browser was flaking I didn't pay attention. Thanks for reminding me I'm human and make mistakes. I'll sleep easier tonight knowing that there is still someone left in the world using the word Whilst(Do ya really talk like that?) Just trying to keep up....

**Guest.Visitor** · 08-26-1998, 09:26 PM

MONMSG

On Wednesday, August 26, 1998, 10:49 AM, Bill Robins wrote: People, Whilst I am thrilled by the number of people helping Willie out, let us learn something from the number of duplicate answers. When you see a question that you have the answer for, look at the number of responses to this question. It is up there and if it says anything other than 1/1, take a look at the next responses to see if the question has already been answered. Another helpful hint is that if the system "acts funny" while trying to post your answer, and you think you need to post again, remember to scan down to the question you answered in that forum and check to see if the first answer may actually have taken. If so, go into either one of them and hit the delete option. Bill On Wednesday, August 26, 1998, 11:43 AM, Michael Daly wrote: If you will notice the timing of our responses, we all saw the initial posting a essentially the same time. We all saw the number of responses to this question as 1/1. We were all writing our responses at the same time. Unless you are the new Webmaster, what business it is of yours? What gives you the right to criticize Jeff for multiple postings? Mind your own damn business. Michael One day, we'll all be heroes. Michael, These forums are a way of people with common interests sharing information. One of the things that distinguish them from many others and make them particularly valuable is the helpful, professional attitude of the participants. The ettiquitte here is largely built from the feedback and consensus of the participants. Bills posting I would suggest was part of this process. In my opinion the kind of petulance shown in your previous post is neither welcome nor appropriate. Derek

**Guest.Visitor** · 08-27-1998, 06:34 AM

MONMSG

Hey I made a mistake, won't happen again. Let's move on. Just trying to keep up....

**J.Pluta** · 08-27-1998, 06:36 AM

MONMSG

And to put another view on this, folks: I don't want to put words into Michael's mouth, but given the overwhelmingly helpful nature of his posts, I'm of the opinion that his was just a highly unusual outburst. I think we've all had days where some things just hit us particularly the wrong way. If you look at the post in a different light, he was actually being solicitous of Jeff (albeit a tad stridently smile). Anyway, my point is that none of us should overreact. Bill pointed out Jeff's repost. Michael expressed his opinion of Bill's opinion. Derek and Luc expressed their opinion of Michael's opinion. And I am expressing MY opinion. And with THAT, I'm off my soapbox. Joe

**wjminc** · 08-27-1998, 09:06 AM

MONMSG

I would like to thank everyone for all there answers. Having multiple examples and answers is great. Some times the answers are vague or to 'teckie' for beginners. Between Luc St-Yves and Michael Daly information, I got what I needed. Thanks again to everyone for there help..... Willie

**daly.michael@verizon.net** · 08-27-1998, 10:50 AM

MONMSG

You are all correct. Bill was correct in posting helpful tips for limiting over-posting. Derek and Luc were correct in admonishing me for my outburst. I'm the one who was wrong. Bill, please accept my apology for lashing out at you for what was so obviously an attempt at being helpful. One day, we'll all be heroes.

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Announcement

MONMSG

MONMSG

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment