This is a multipart message in MIME format.
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
>DDS provides a place to store your source
So does:  RUNSQLSTM, STRQMQRY, homegrowns based on STRQMQRY and a host of
other tools to store your SQL source

>DDS provides a field reference file
But if everyone used the same field names and PREFIX or QUALIFIED then the
system file QADBIFLD would be terrific.
Also, a SQL UDT would be a better substitute for a field reference file.

But if you >never use sql< then I can understand the grounding for your

Rob Berendt
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin

"Al Barsa/Barsa Consulting" <>
Sent by:
04/23/2002 04:53 PM
Please respond to midrange-l

        To:     "M. Lazarus" <>
        Fax to:
        Subject:        Re: Fwd: Request for CL, DDS, SQL RPG enhancements

With COMMON being last week, I've been buried.

See my in-line comments below.


Al Barsa, Jr.
Barsa Consulting Group, LLC


914-251-9406 fax

>To all Midrangers,
>  I have an opportunity, in about 1.5 weeks, to participate in a
>call with some IBM product managers and software engineering managers in
>Rochester.  The topic:  What is missing from CLP, DDS and embedded SQL in
>  What I am requesting is your favorite enhancements you'd like to see,
>peeves, how things could work better, etc.  If a code snippet would make
>your position clearer, by all means include it (especially for the
>SQL stuff.)  If possible or applicable, please include business or
>programming reasons for the request.
>  Some items to get things started:
>-  Are you upset w/ the direction IBM has taken regarding DDS vs. SQL?

Absolutely.  You need to be able to define anything in DDS that can
otherwise be done only in SQL.  Although DDS is proprietary to the 400, it
provides a place to store your source, and permits the extremely powerful
field reference file capability, missing from SQL.

>-  Do you need more than one file defined in CLP?

You won't get this one, because this would break existing code.  To be
to have more than one file defined in a CLP, your RCVF would have to
reference which file.  I can live calling a subprogram, and if you did it
in bound modules, the overhead for the call would be low.

>-  Do you need to be able to update files within CLP?

I would find this useful, I'm unsure if you will get it.

>-  Are you fighting w/ embedded SQL, due to precompiler restrictions?

No, I never use SQL.
>  I don't know if it will lead to any major changes, but at least IBM is
>  Please send them to me directly, not to the list.
>  Thank you!
>  -mark
Other things that I need in CL:

1).  Variables longer than 9999.
2).  More than 300 elements in a list.  (This is a hardcoded thing, and
will require program retranslation when we get it.)
3).  Subroutines
4).  Real loops

This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
To post a message email:
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
or email:
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives

This thread ...

Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page