The CAPTURING clause has the disadvantage of capturing what might be a huge
amount of output (not with the COUNT command, but with other commands), so
hushing may be preferable in some circumstances.
Why execute a HUSH? There's a basic HUSH statement that would be more efficient.
What's the purpo
Not quite sure what you are asking with this.
One just does a job. The other does any job supplied on the command line.
You could avoid the performance penalty the three executes imposes, by using
just 1:
EXECUTE "HUSH ON": @AM: "COUNT VOC": @AM: "HUSH OFF"
-- or --
EXECUTE "H
EXECUTE "COUNT VOC" CAPTURING L.OUTPUT
$0.02
-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Wjhonson
Sent: Friday, 24 February 2012 9:06 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: [U2] Hushing commands
EXECUTE
EXECUTE "HUSH ON"
EXECUTE "COUNT VOC"
EXECUTE "HUSH OFF"
vs
HUSHUP
001 EXECUTE "HUSH ON"
002 EXECUTE OCONV(@COMMAND,'G1 99')
003 EXECUTE "HUSH OFF"
HUSHUP COUNT VOC
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mail
