Conference ilbbak::ibi_focus

    Further testing of this problem has led me to believe this is a bug
    with Version 6.1.1  I have run this logic on a machine still running
    Version 6.1.0 and it works fine.
    
    Is there a contact person to identify if this is a known "bug" or to
    report it ??
    
    Sharon

    I'm not *really* sure, bu intuitively I wouldn't have thought that
    Focus could handle that construct, given the 'view' across two files.
    (Although if it worked on a previous release.... ?).
    
    That may be the problem here; the recurring nightmare where "new
    & improved" releases are less tolerant of un-documented (& therefore
    un-supported) features.
    
    ttfn
    
    Paul K
    

    Well - guess I cried "bug" a little too soon ( I should know better ;-)
    
    I kind of over simplified my example in .0  As it happens there were
    other lines in my USE statements define those files as individual files
    and concatenating them as another DDNAME.  In other words, I really
    had...
    
    USE
    BACK1.FOC   READ AS BACKLOG
    BACK2.FOC   READ AS BACKLOG
    BACK1.FOC   READ
    BACK2.FOC   READ
    BACK1.FOC   READ AS TWOBACK
    BACK2.FOC   READ AS TWOBACK
    END
    
    Removing the last 4 lines and only keeping the ones necessary for my
    .FEX corrects the problem.  The USE .FEX on the 6.1.0 machine was not
    like the one above and I can't use the file there today to see if
    there would be a problem in prior versions.  Can't rationalize why
    this would cause this problem, either !  Just when you think you're
    getting to know how FOCUS behaves ..... 
    
    Sharon  

Hi all,

I figured I'd update you on my further investigation.  I've uncovered some
bizarre behavior when using alternate views, and it isn't restricted to
use in conjunction with concatenation (guess I'll change my note title).  
While there are ways to stop this behavior from happening, in my opinion 
things should not really happen in this manner. ( but I didn't say the 
bug-word ).

In words what happens is ....

When using an alternate view (Table file DDNAME.FIELD_NAME)  if there are
any other USE statements in the USE directory where the DDNAME equals the
physical file name associated with the DDNAME you're using, it will use that 
USE statement's translation rather than the one you specified in your TABLE
request. Clear as mud, right ?

I'll use a concatenation example first to clarify ( this is the one that 
probably would really be used most often )

USE
Q1DATA.FOC  READ AS Q1DATA
Q2DATA.FOC  READ AS Q2DATA
Q1DATA.FOC  READ AS FYDATA
Q2DATA.FOC  READ AS FYDATA
END

1) DDNAME FYDATA points to physical file Q1DATA.FOC first, then Q2DATA.FOC
2) DDNAME Q1DATA points to physical file Q1DATA.FOC only.

When TABLE FILE FYDATA.VIEW_FIELD is issued data is only pulled from the file
associated with the Q1DATA DDNAME (Q1DATA.FOC)- not the FYDATA one.  Reversing 
the order (sequence) of the FYDATA use statements causes only data from 
Q2DATA DDNAME (Q2DATA.FOC) to be pulled.

The easiest work-around is to make sure that the single file DDNAME's
are called something other than the physical file name.  Then the problem
goes away.  It's not something you would generally think you'd have to
do though.

If you're still with me here, I'll give you an example of one that isn't
specific to using concatenated files ( although after you see this strange
behavior you might disagree ). Probably wouldn't ever do this, but if it
was done here's what happens.

USE
Q1DATA.FOC  READ AS Q2DATA
Q2DATA.FOC  READ AS Q1DATA
END

1) DDNAME Q2DATA points to physical file Q1DATA.FOC only.
2) DDNAME Q1DATA points to physical file Q2DATA.FOC only.

TABLE FILE Q2DATA.VIEW_FIELD pulls data from physical file Q2DATA.FOC only,
even though it is pointing to Q1DATA.FOC only. ( probably what you expected
would happen ), but ....

TABLE FILE Q1DATA.VIEW_FIELD pulls data from both Q1DATA.FOC and Q2DATA.FOC
(concatenates them ??? Why ???).  My head started hurting right around this 
discovery, so maybe whoever is still reading this note can figure out why
FOCUS thought it should concatenate these files.

Reversing the sequence of the USE statements to 

USE
Q2DATA.FOC  READ AS Q1DATA
Q1DATA.FOC  READ AS Q2DATA
END

Causes TABLE FILE Q1DATA.VIEW_FIELD to pull data from Q2DATA.FOC only.
       TABLE FILE Q2DATA.VIEW_FIELD pulls data from both files.

I don't have a 3rd file to play with, so I don't know what would happen
if there's more than 2.  

Well, that's the facts as I know them today.  Glad I'll be working in
COBOL for a while ;-)

Sharon

Sharon,

	Can't say it any other way, looks like a bug to me. Probably in
	FOCUS filename translation layer; there seems to be some confusion
	between vms name and ddname (least to say...). Well this part was
	change for FOCUS 6.0 and long filenames support, someone probably
	forgot a piece in alternate view .... (Not me)

	Someone should forward this to IBI, and I'm sure they'll be ashame
	to leave it there much longer. I don't know what's the appropriate
	channel, but it should arrive to IBI's VAX Hotline Michael Einstein
	or VAX QA Joe Donaghy.


Jean-Claude.

    Jean-Claude,
    
    Thanks for your corroborating opinion.  Does anyone know if there is
    a formal process to report this type of thing to IBI, if not I guess
    I'll just go ahead and call the names you mentioned.  This is DEC,
    though, so there has to be some type of form or something to fill out 
    ;-)
    
    Sharon