Re: [foxboro] One IND block per compound -- still true?

On Thu, September 25, 2008 7:29 pm, Corey R Clingo wrote:

> OK, I might be turning into an HLBL crackhead :)

He's done step over to the dark side!

> I never saw any mention of the 1-IND-per-compound restriction I've
> heard for all these years, and so I wonder if that limit is still
> real?

I've never heard of that limit. And we have many, many instances of
multiple IND blocks in a compound. Code away!

One thing I'd caution you, be it that you are a neophyte at HLBL. The
default BPCSTM is (IIRC) 100. If you don't change that default to
something reasonable *and* if your codes loop infinitely without a WAIT
statement, you'll drag your CP to its knee in no time flat.

It's good to learn from your mistake; it's better to learn from others'.

Duc




 
 
_______________________________________________________________________
This mailing list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Invensys Process
Systems (formerly The Foxboro Company). Use the info you obtain here at
your own risks. Read http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html
 
foxboro mailing list:             http://www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe:         mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
to unsubscribe:      mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave

Other related posts: