RE: scanRecord for 3.14

["Redman, Russell O." <Russell.Redman@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca>]

Yes, I use scanRecord in many places and love it.  I am currently running
R3.13.5.  The absence of scanRecord or an equivalent in R3.14 would be a
complete show-stopper for an upgrade.  

I have never looked at sscanRecord before, but just reading the
documentation it looks like a superset of the scanRecord with  somewhat
clearer documentation.  Would an sscanRecord be a direct substitute for a
scanRecord (i.e. backwards compatible)?  

I am puzzled, however, because the documentation explicitly states that it
uses recDynLink which is normally distributed as part of the package.  If
the purpose of the suggested changes is to escape from recDynLink, how would
we be better off using sscanRecord?

Cheers,
Dr. Russell O. Redman
Tel: (250) 363-6917 | Fax: (250) 363-0045
<mailto:Russell.Redman@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca>
National Research Council Canada | Conseil national de recherches Canada
5071 West Saanich Road           | 5071 West Saanich Road
Victoria, B. C. V9E 2E7          | Victoria, C.-B. V9E 2E7
Government of Canada             | Gouvernement du Canada

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marty Kraimer [mailto:mrk@aps.anl.gov]
> Sent: Friday, 2003 December 05 1:02 PM
> To: tech-talk@aps.anl.gov
> Subject: scanRecord for 3.14
> 
> 
> The next 3.14 release will support put callbacks for database 
> channel access 
> links. This is being done so that synapps can remove it's 
> dependence on recDynLink.
> 
> 3.13 and early versions of 3.14 has support for scanRecord. 
> This was removed 
> from 3.14 because it required recDynLink. Now that put 
> callback links will be 
> supported the scanRecord could be easily modified so that it 
> no longer requires 
> recDynLink.
> 
> The question I have is does anyone use scanRecord?
> Synapps provides sscanRecord which provides more 
> functionality than scanRecord 
> so is scanRecord still needed?
> 
> Marty Kraimer
>