Micro Focus 2.4.38 EXTFH and Micro Focus 3.1.35 compiler 
Author Message
 Micro Focus 2.4.38 EXTFH and Micro Focus 3.1.35 compiler

I think I already know the answer to this one, but I figured that I would
ask anyways.  I want to use a "newer" version of the MF compiler (3.1.35)
but without converting any data files (wait, that's not the punch line).
The data files were created under 2.4.38, so I figured, if I setup the new
compiler, but link in the "old" EXTFH.OBJ file to the final executable,
that it just might work.  Ok, so there's got to be more to it than that ...
but does anyone have any idea if this is even remotely feasible or not.
(ok, you can start laughing now).

Thanks for your input and for not laughing too hard (I did when I thought
of this, but yeah ... you never know until you try).
D.




Wed, 07 Jul 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Micro Focus 2.4.38 EXTFH and Micro Focus 3.1.35 compiler

I don't think linking in the old extfh is a good idea.
What about the Micro Focus rebuild utility for the new compiler.
You can give the rebuild program you key layout and it recreates the idx
file.

Quote:

> I think I already know the answer to this one, but I figured that I would
> ask anyways.  I want to use a "newer" version of the MF compiler (3.1.35)
> but without converting any data files (wait, that's not the punch line).
> The data files were created under 2.4.38, so I figured, if I setup the new
> compiler, but link in the "old" EXTFH.OBJ file to the final executable,
> that it just might work.  Ok, so there's got to be more to it than that ...
> but does anyone have any idea if this is even remotely feasible or not.
> (ok, you can start laughing now).

> Thanks for your input and for not laughing too hard (I did when I thought
> of this, but yeah ... you never know until you try).
> D.





Thu, 08 Jul 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Micro Focus 2.4.38 EXTFH and Micro Focus 3.1.35 compiler

The file formats are supposed to be compatible so you should be able to
use the 3.1 EXTFH.  At least that's what MF says.  I have seen instances
where 2.x files are not readable under 3.x.  If your files don't use
data or key compression, you should be fine.  I would suggest running a
rebuild in them first.

--
Jamie Burks

Phone: 901-922-4472



Fri, 09 Jul 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Micro Focus 2.4.38 EXTFH and Micro Focus 3.1.35 compiler



Quote:
> I think I already know the answer to this one, but I figured that I would
> ask anyways.  I want to use a "newer" version of the MF compiler (3.1.35)
> but without converting any data files (wait, that's not the punch line).
> The data files were created under 2.4.38, so I figured, if I setup the
new
> compiler, but link in the "old" EXTFH.OBJ file to the final executable,
> that it just might work.  Ok, so there's got to be more to it than that
..
> but does anyone have any idea if this is even remotely feasible or not.
> (ok, you can start laughing now).

Doug,

I went from Micro Focus Version 1.1.17(Run Time Version 2.1)  of the
compiler to version 3.1.31 with no difficulty. I had to rebuild the
occasional index, but that was about it. The only reason I even had to do
that was because the new version catches some problems that the old system
ignored. I was able to maintain my data files as they were with no
conversion whatsoever. You should be in even better shape coming from
Version 2.4.28. No need to waste your time and try to fix a problem that
doesn't exist! Although you can if you want, especially considering you're
e-mail address indicates you work for one of my competitors.:-)

John



Sat, 10 Jul 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Micro Focus 2.4.38 EXTFH and Micro Focus 3.1.35 compiler

John:

Well, I already tried the "simple" recompile all the source under 3.1.35
and rebuild the data files.
No problems there ... UNTIL you try to add another record to one of the
indexed data files that was
rebuilt.  The compiler returns a disk full error.  Unfortunately, this
seems to only happen
on SOME of the indexed files, but not all.  No data compression is being
used, it's not a duplicate key
issue, and if I run the rebuilds with a input file/output file, it corrects
the problem.  I can't ask our client's
to do this, however, because (1) it would be a support nightmare (over 2000
clients) and (2) many of
these doctor's are still using 80286 computers (as if they couldn't afford
to buy new ones) with a 100 meg
Hard disk and a 60+ meg charge file (no room for the output file...).

So, that's why I can't use the MF 3.1.35 EXTFH.  God I love programming.

D.

P.S.
What company do you work for?



Quote:



> > I think I already know the answer to this one, but I figured that I
would
> > ask anyways.  I want to use a "newer" version of the MF compiler
(3.1.35)
> > but without converting any data files (wait, that's not the punch
line).
> > The data files were created under 2.4.38, so I figured, if I setup the
> new
> > compiler, but link in the "old" EXTFH.OBJ file to the final executable,
> > that it just might work.  Ok, so there's got to be more to it than that
> ..
> > but does anyone have any idea if this is even remotely feasible or not.
> > (ok, you can start laughing now).

> Doug,

> I went from Micro Focus Version 1.1.17(Run Time Version 2.1)  of the
> compiler to version 3.1.31 with no difficulty. I had to rebuild the
> occasional index, but that was about it. The only reason I even had to do
> that was because the new version catches some problems that the old
system
> ignored. I was able to maintain my data files as they were with no
> conversion whatsoever. You should be in even better shape coming from
> Version 2.4.28. No need to waste your time and try to fix a problem that
> doesn't exist! Although you can if you want, especially considering
you're
> e-mail address indicates you work for one of my competitors.:-)

> John



Mon, 12 Jul 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Micro Focus 2.4.38 EXTFH and Micro Focus 3.1.35 compiler

Jamie:

Well, they are supposed to be compatible, but I discovered that after
rebuilding
the index on one of our data files, that I could no longer add data records

(received disk full errors).  Now, I didn't run the rebuilds with an
input/output, I
 just recreated the index itself.  Running the rebuild with the
input/output specified
fixes this record adding problem, but I can't have our clients do this
(many don't
have enough HD space for the output file).

Let me know if you have any other ideas.
Thanks.
D.



Quote:
> The file formats are supposed to be compatible so you should be able to
> use the 3.1 EXTFH.  At least that's what MF says.  I have seen instances
> where 2.x files are not readable under 3.x.  If your files don't use
> data or key compression, you should be fine.  I would suggest running a
> rebuild in them first.

> --
> Jamie Burks

> Phone: 901-922-4472



Mon, 12 Jul 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Micro Focus 2.4.38 EXTFH and Micro Focus 3.1.35 compiler

do you know where i can get a free or really inexpensive compiler for a
beginner for DOS or Windows? please ask around. thanks.

j.m.



Tue, 13 Jul 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 8 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. Micro Focus EXTFH and mFFH - Different?

2. newbie--micro-focus personal compiler

3. compiler for micro focus cobol

4. Micro Focus Compiler

5. Micro Focus Personal Cobol Compiler

6. Micro Focus SQL Pre-compiler

7. Micro Focus COBOL compiler desperately needed

8. Micro Focus compiler error - help needed

9. IBM 370 ASM emulator from Micro Focus

10. Announce: Micro Focus WWW server

11. ODBC From Micro Focus

12. Micro-focus Coble

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software