> Were your discussions with "STL" done before or after > "Metal-C" became available?
Yes: before AND after. I had to examine my archives and files to answer your question. They took place around these dates: Most weeks every month during: o February through August 2001 o March through June 2002 o August through November 2002 o July 2008 and scattered days in-between. I consider the February 2001 through November 2002 extended conversation the "first engagement." The second one was held in July 2008 when IBM came to us (and another customer) for explanation. Basically, we just re-sent the same emails we had sent to IBM before in 2001-2002 to the new point person du month for the issue -- with newly-written cover letters and more patient explanations attached. > As I have said before, I just don't see the "harm" in > creating a SHARE requirement for this There would obviously be no extraordinary harm in doing so. Since Dave Day has a head start, let's see how far he gets with his problem. But I suspect he isn't going to get into any issue that resulted in our abandoning the use of the binder API at this end. He observed something odd and unexpected that very much surprised him. Now, will IBM consider what he has found to be a bug (this time)? I have a prediction: No. It will be a WAD. We shall see (if we're lucky). -- WB ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
