> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> I vaguely remember one of ISVs said on the IBM-MAIN,
> that his > product (zDebug AFAIR) does not need to check dependencies in
> SMP/E, > because all the dependencies which have to be checked are checked >
> *during runtime*. That method is *much better* than SMP/E. It can be > hard
> to implement and not always applicable, but it checks *reality*, > not some
> entries in KSDS.
At the risk of being flamed (both for agreeing with what Radoslaw wrote above
and also for mentioning a product I'm involved with), I have to say that
SimpList works the same way. It checks dependencies at runtime, and to me this
offers many advantages over using SMP/E.
Coding a product to check dependencies at runtime requires extra effort, but it
makes the product much easier to install as SMP/E isn't required. Application
programmers and even non-technical end users have installed SimpList in a
matter of minutes. In addition, companies are able to upgrade to new operating
systems or fall back to old ones or run with mixed systems (etc) with no
concern as to which version of SimpList is being used.
I don't have anything against SMP/E and I agree there are situations where
SMP/E makes a whole lot of sense. I just don't think it's true to say that
SMP/E always makes sense in every situation.
Dave Salt
See the new SimpList(tm) rollover image
at:http://www.mackinney.com/products/SIM/simplist.htm
_________________________________________________________________
Use fowl language with Chicktionary. Click here to start playing!
http://puzzles.sympatico.msn.ca/chicktionary/index.html?icid=htmlsig
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
