Do PROTERMCAP settings affect compilation?

Posted by Jeff Ledbetter on 25-Jul-2016 13:58

Hi.

Odd question: will changing the PROTERMCAP #co value to 132 have any effect on a FORM statement during compilation?

Thanks.

All Replies

Posted by Matt Gilarde on 25-Jul-2016 15:19

Yes. If you don't specify a width for the form the compiler calculates the form's width based on its contents. If your terminal is 132 columns wide the compiler will use up to 132 columns to lay out the form. It only uses as many columns as necessary so the form's width may be less than 132 columns, but not more.

In batch mode there's a bug which limits the form's width to 80 columns regardless of the width of the terminal. It's fixed in recent versions but you have to opt in to the fix using the -batchwidth <n> startup parameter to specify the number of columns to use in batch mode.

Posted by Jeff Ledbetter on 25-Jul-2016 16:13

Thanks Matt.

What version is the batch mode bug fixed in?

Posted by Matt Gilarde on 25-Jul-2016 16:24

It was fixed in 11.6.0. The fix is also included in current 10.2B08 hotfixes.

Posted by Rob Fitzpatrick on 25-Jul-2016 16:27

According to the KB (knowledgebase.progress.com/.../p), the -batchwidth parameter was added in 11.6.  

But it isn't in the NeRF manual or the Startup Command & Parameter Reference manual.

Posted by ChUIMonster on 25-Jul-2016 17:51

Doesn't this only impact frames that are missing a specific WIDTH in WITH phrase?

Posted by Matt Gilarde on 26-Jul-2016 02:15

[quote user="ChUIMonster"]

Doesn't this only impact frames that are missing a specific WIDTH in WITH phrase?[/quote]Yes. The batch mode bug is that the maximum frame width is hard-coded to 80 columns. There was no way to use any other terminal size in batch mode. -batchwidth lets you specify the terminal width for batch mode. We didn't make it automatically match the terminal width because that's not always what you want.

Posted by RAJ DEV on 26-Jul-2016 02:25

Dear Matt , can you help on how to hotfixes in 10.2B version

Posted by RAJ DEV on 26-Jul-2016 02:30

Dear Matt ,

Thanking you for your information.can you share the documents which you related to batch process


At 26 Jul 2016 07:17:43 +0000 (+00:00) from Matt Gilarde <bounce-mattg@community.progress.com>:
  Update from Progress Community
Matt Gilarde

 

 

 
ChUIMonster

Doesn't this only impact frames that are missing a specific WIDTH in WITH phrase?

 

Yes. The batch mode bug is that the maximum frame width is hard-coded to 80 columns. There was no way to use any other terminal size in batch mode. -batchwidth lets you specify the terminal width for batch mode. We didn't make it automatically match the terminal width because that's not always what you want.

 

 

 

View online

 

You received this notification because you subscribed to the forum.  To unsubscribe from only this thread, go here.

Flag this post as spam/abuse.

This thread is closed