MSIR.0844 Previous undefined macro variable: Difference between revisions

From m204wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (1 revision)
(Automatically generated page update)
 
(4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
When the first macro statement was encountered in a request, a possible macro variable (something that begins with <tt>?!</tt>) had already been bypassed. For backward compatibility with existing applications, a <tt>?!</tt> is assumed '''not''' to be a macro variable if no macro statements are encountered. Encountering a macro statement after such a variable has been bypassed suggests that assumption might have been incorrect.  
When the first macro statement was encountered in a request, a possible macro variable (something that begins with <b>?!</b>) had already been bypassed. For backward compatibility with existing applications, a <b>?!</b> is assumed '''not''' to be a macro variable if no macro statements are encountered. Encountering a macro statement after such a variable has been bypassed suggests that assumption might have been incorrect.  


If, indeed, the <tt>?!</tt> was simply meant as a literal, it must be changed if macro statements are to be used. If the <tt>?!</tt> appears in a comment, it can simply be removed. Otherwise, such a literal must be "disguised," perhaps by breaking it up into two strings that are concatenated using the <tt>With</tt> operator.
If, indeed, the <b>?!</b> was simply meant as a literal, it must be changed if macro statements are to be used. If the <b>?!</b> appears in a comment, it can simply be removed. Otherwise, such a literal must be "disguised," perhaps by breaking it up into two strings that are concatenated using the <var>With</var> operator.


[[Category:Sirius Mods Messages]]
{{Template:MSIR.0844 footer}}
[[Category:MSIR.0800 - MSIR.0999]]

Latest revision as of 23:35, 3 March 2017

When the first macro statement was encountered in a request, a possible macro variable (something that begins with ?!) had already been bypassed. For backward compatibility with existing applications, a ?! is assumed not to be a macro variable if no macro statements are encountered. Encountering a macro statement after such a variable has been bypassed suggests that assumption might have been incorrect.

If, indeed, the ?! was simply meant as a literal, it must be changed if macro statements are to be used. If the ?! appears in a comment, it can simply be removed. Otherwise, such a literal must be "disguised," perhaps by breaking it up into two strings that are concatenated using the With operator.


Message attributes:

RETCODEO=0Sets online return code
RETCODEB=4Sets batch (single user) return code
CLASS=EError class; the message can be suppressed with the X'04' bit setting of the MSGCTL parameter
AUDITERWrites the message with line type ER to the audit trail
COUNTIncrements the error count (ERCNT) parameter
ECHODisplays the line that caused the error

Back to list of messages