RE: Two reade loops: which one preferred ?

Not only that, but when you do a CHAIN, if you do not get a hit, you do
not set the record pointer, so the next READ/READE will give "Undefined
Results".

-----Original Message-----
From: Clapham, Paul [mailto:pclapham@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2003 11:52 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: RE: Two reade loops: which one preferred ?

I found this out the hard way too... CHAIN isn't equivalent to
SETLL-READE.
READE sets the %EOF "indicator" if it doesn't find a record, but CHAIN
doesn't, it sets %FOUND (I believe). So if you want a single loop test,
it
needs to be %EOF, and therefore CHAIN to initialize the loop doesn't
work.

PC2

-----Original Message-----
From: Vern Hamberg [mailto:vhamberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: November 21, 2003 09:37
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: RE: Two reade loops: which one preferred ?


OK, I'm doing C these days and haven't done free-form RPG. Is CHAIN
gone? 
Why the SETLL-READE combination, when CHAIN is equivalent?