screens other than 0-9 (was: Re: Windows 2003/IIS 6issues...newand improved ones.)

[GCC Consulting]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: 
> filepro-list-bounces+gccconsulting=comcast.net at lists.celestial
> .com 
> [mailto:filepro-list-bounces+gccconsulting=comcast.net at lists.c
> elestial.com] On Behalf Of Fairlight
> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 10:44 AM
> To: filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> Subject: Re: screens other than 0-9 (was: Re: Windows 
> 2003/IIS 6issues...newand improved ones.)
> 
> In the relative spacial/temporal region of Thu, May 24, 2007 
> at 10:33:13AM -0400, Jay Ashworth achieved the spontaneous 
> generation of the following:
> > On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 09:51:47AM -0400, Fairlight wrote:
> > > I'm forced to wonder why I should have to create a special menu 
> > > option, or at the very least enter a special command just 
> to get at 
> > > something that should be just as easily accessible at 0-9.
> > 
> > Because they were added on afterwards.  :-)
> 
> By that logic, with 5.6, if you want to access an automatic 
> index past R, one of the new ones, you should have to nave a 
> special command line flag specifying anything in the range of 
> Q-Z, not be able to just type it in whenever an index 
> selection is called for.  And boy, I bet people would scream 
> over that.
> 
> I look at it this way:  a screen is a screen is a screen.  
> Anywhere you should be able to access a screen, the name of 
> the screen should be wholly irrelevant.  It's not like 
> they're even formatted differently.
> 
> It's really not worth getting into a big discussion over it 
> for me.  I'm just saying, poor design decision, IMHO.

Mark,

I have a number of application where I don't want users to have access to
all screens or they may be limited function screens which run with a
different processing table.  The named screens either one letter or named
allow me to do just this. 

I had one application which needed 12 screens to display/enter all of the
data.  The sequence was 1-0 and a & b.  I use @key with switchto to display
screens a and b.  The user never knew the difference.

If you want a debug screen for your use, either create a numbered screen
that is pass worded so only you have access or create a screen that is not
delivered to a client.  I tend to use screen 0 as my debug screen and 1-9 or
whatever for the application.

If you only have one screen being used, why create a named screen when there
are plenty of numbers left for use?

Richard