With regards to the Numeric Only field, I checked things out more closely
and it looks like you are doing it right. Shifting is only required if
explicitly specified in the FFW or in the case of the Field Minus key used
in a Signed Numeric field.
With regards the gold standard, I would choose the Client Access emulator as
a good choice for defining the 5250 standard. It seems to behave exactly
like a real 5250 terminal. The easiest way to get a trace of a Client
Access session is on the AS400 side.
----- Original Message -----
From: Jason M. Felice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Arno Schortinghuis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2000 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: Number Only Fields
> I'm CCing the list on this message, as it contains information relevant to
the
> current status of the Number Only field bug, and I'm way too lazy to write
> more than one message ;)
>
> On Tue, Jan 04, 2000 at 10:08:06AM -0800, Arno Schortinghuis wrote:
> > As to the Numeric Only field, that is exactly how I handled it. Shift
field,
> > fill if necessary and overpunch the last byte on Field- (with xD0).
>
> This is starting to worry me. I just tried another emulator (WinAPPC),
and it
> suffers the exact same "problems" as the Java emulator. It doesn't shift
the
> data to the right on Field Exit or Field-, the shifted digit always ends
> up being '}' no matter what the digit was before. And I get the same
error as
> the Java emulator from the host, although I think I can write that off as
> a problem with my silly CL script (I don't know much about CL).
>
> I'm about to try Client Access, but I'm going crazy here. I've devised a
way
> that I can use a traffic sniffer to snoop the session, thus not requiring
me
> to play man-in-the-middle to get a hex-dump of the session.
>
> >
> > I know its a bit of a pain, but it is possible to get a comm trace on
the
> > AS400. This can be narrowed down to at least the source TCP/IP address.
I
> > had to do this a few times when I got conflicting results from different
> > emulators. I used a real 5250 terminal as the gold standard.
>
> Hmm, I have no "real" 5250 terminal, unfortunately.
>
> >
> > I have been following this discussion group for a while and am curious
why
> > the project was shifted from C++ to C. Did you consider wxWindows as a
> > basis for the Windows port?
>
> The big reasons were portability, flexibility, and light-weight - in that
> order. Only recently (with the release of gcc 2.95.1, which used to be
egcs)
> has Linux gotten a modern *and standard* C++ compiler which supports
templates,
> namespaces, and all the rest well enough to make it worthwhile. At the
time
> (and still now, to a degree), C++ is a shifting language, and porting
between
> different C++ implementations can be a nightmare. We had issues at one
point
> when someone tried porting one of the C++ versions to NeXT, which had an
> older C++ compiler.
>
> As for the flexibility and light-weight issues, this is observed from the
> GTK+ code itself. You can produce C++ or Ada95 or Scheme or TCL/TK or
Perl
> or whatever language bindings you want for lib5250 if it is written in C.
If
> it is written in C++, sometimes you have issues for conflicting headers
and
> what not.
>
> As for light-weight, there has been interest in making a Linux-based
boot-disk
> which turns a 486 into a dumb terminal, which is somewhat similar to what
the
> Linux Terminal Server Project (http://www.ltsp.org/) has done with the
> emulator (well, sort of - they use the remoting ability of X-windows and
the
> ability to boot Linux from a DHCP/boot/NFS server).
>
> Really, when Mike started this project, he intended for his 'final
version' to
> be in C and not C++ all along, he just used C++ initially to prototype it.
> All that being said, it really is object-oriented still. There is a sort
of
> formal structure requiring structures with `constructors', `destructors',
and
> `methods'.
>
> -Jay 'Eraserhead' Felice
>
> +---
> | This is the LINUX5250 Mailing List!
> | To submit a new message, send your mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> | To subscribe to this list send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> | To unsubscribe from this list send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> +---
>
+---
| This is the LINUX5250 Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| To subscribe to this list send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+---
