eam@soleil.UUCP (Ed A. Mills) (10/07/89)
Having used all of the above tools, I'm either ignorant of or dissapointed with automatic means to link these products in practice. In LSE I can edit a source, but I have to MANUALLY replace the MMS version after exiting the editor. Same with SCA; the .ANA file is manually replaced (loaded) into SCA. After bouncing around through 24 modules, damned if I remember which ones I changed and which ones I just looked at. Poor rev-control? Probably, but after CMS reserving, CMS Commenting, editing, compiling, reviewing, exiting, CMS replacing, SCA loading, linking, testing, and debugging, all to make a change that should take about 60 seconds, I've forgone rev-control for efficient updates. Suggestion: bind these products tighter so that the reserving, replacing, loading, and commenting can be automated and controlled from LSE. Individually these are all good, effective products. But collectively in a program development mode, there is too much overhead in using them. For example: LSE COMMAND>goto file cat.dog~/CMS_Comment = "changing flea section" could reserve the file in the current MMS library, place the latest rev in the current directory, comment the reservation, and of course load the file into the current buffer. Upon exiting, the ELEMENT could be automatically replaced. Similar commands could be used to update SCA. Also, SCA>load *.ana/CHANGED might scan all .ANA files and load only changes. I sincerely hope that I'm ignorant of better means to use these tools. I'd welcome any and all users who have recommendations on how to more effeciently use them. Meanwhile, DEC, if I'm using these tools as effeciently as I can, I hope you're busy binding these tools together for VMS 6.0! Ed Mills Harris Semiconductor Melbourne, FL 32901