Re: data structure overlay question.

>Date: Fri, 04 Jan 02 09:07:27 +1100
>From: "Simon Coulter" <shc@flybynight.com.au>
> ...
>I believe this is a bug because the following clumsy work-around causes
>the overlays to be built correctly.
>
>DDSINPUT        E DS                  EXTNAME(DSUPDPAG)
>
>D DSDATA                       159                  overlay(DSINPUT)
>D $fill1                              like(QZSESS ) overlay(DSdata)
>D $fill2                              like(QZBTCH ) overlay(DSdata:*next)
> ...
>Notice that I have inserted a field which overlays the entire DS and the
>other fields overlay that.  I didn't bother to pore over the RPG
>Reference but I can see no difference between overlaying the DS name and
>a subfield.  You should open an APAR with IBM support to get this fixed.
>(It may be Working As Designed but it sure ain't correct.)
> ...

Simon, "*next" _could_ have meant "after the most recent one", but
in fact it means "next available".  By the way, you don't have to
specify a length for DSDATA - leaving out the 159 would make your
work-around less clumsy.

>From the desolate RPG reference:
"Specifying OVERLAY(name:*NEXT) positions the subfield at the next
available position within the overlaid field."

>And why can't I code:
>
>D $QzAmt          S                   like(QZAMT1 ) based(%addr(qzamt1))
>D                                      dim(12)
>
>and let the compiler worry about the pointer?

A good question.  I've added this to our list of possible future
enhancements.

Barbara Morris