Re: Upgrading from I4GL 1.10??

Oh ding, I was sitting and dithering about which way around it was and got it wrong. Foo on me! Thanks Marco. Art S. Kagel Marco Greco wrote: > > It is in fact the other way round, and you have to use CURSOR_NAME when > preparing > statements that make use of a cursor, eg > > let xxx="update blah set blah=1 where current of my_cursor" > > becomes > > let xxx="update blah set blah=1 where current of ", cursor_name("my_cursor") > > or, if you use unique cursor names across your application (eg if prefix the > name with a module mnemonic), just use -globcurs > -- > Ciao, > Marco > ______________________________________________________________________________ > Marco Greco <marco@informix.com> Standard disclaimers apply! > > Informix faq http://www.iiug.org/techinfo/faq/informix.htm > 4glworks http://www.ctonline.it/~marcog > Informix on Linux http://www.ctonline.it/~marcog/ifmxlinux.htm > > "Art S. Kagel" wrote: > > > > The only gotcha to the move should be the change from global cursor names to > > module scoped cursor names. There is a commandline option to C4GL to revert > > to the older behavior if that gives you trouble. > > > > On using gcc with 4GL you have to pass the -fwriteable-strings options to gcc > > because 4GL writes to pointers to literal strings which GCC does not permit > > by default. > > > > Art S. Kagel > > > > mdchachi@my-deja.com wrote: > > > > > > Yes, you read the subject right. I have an application running on > > > I4GL 1.10 (on C-ISAM database 2.10) circa 1990. > > > We're considering upgrading to the latest 4GL and maybe D-4GL. > > > The question is, how much coding work is involved? I'm assuming > > > newer versions of I4GL have some changed syntax and functionality > > > that would necessitate some code modifications. > > > > > > So, just how much work might need to be done? > > > Would it be only minor stuff or do you think there is a lot > > > of work in modifying the code for modern-day I4GL? > > > > > > Also, does anybody happen to know if there are any limitations > > > on trying to compile this ancient version with gcc on Solaris? > > > Right we're running a SunOS-compiled version in binary-compatible > > > mode. Just thought I'd ask before trying to set up gcc on the > > > Solaris machine. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > > > Before you buy.