Re: more based() %addr array questions!!! found my problem:

Hans!

no apology necessary!   As long as I know how, and can count on consistant
behaviour, I'm all for it!   The only problem I had was the implicit
definition of the pointer variable.

I very much like the technique we've been rangling with over the past week
or so.  Now that I know how and why pointers work, I'm glad to have them.

don't leave ALL the geeky stuff to the system geeks! we application
programmers like to think we can handle anything you system guys throw our
way!

Rick
--original message-- Hans sez:

Barbara wrote:
>Rick, it's a "feature" of the ILE RPG compiler, that you don't have to
>explicitly define a basing pointer.  It's not an accidental feature, but
>it was misguided in my unofficial-not-speaking-for-IBM opinion.

Well, that was probably my fault.  From under my own unoffical-
not-speaking-for-IBM hat (which I normally wear anyways), I regret
adding a couple of specific features to the RPG IV language.  The
more I think about it, the more I think adding pointers to the
language was a bad idea.  Pointers belong in systems programming
languages, not languages intended for application programming.
Pointers are basically the "goto" of data structures.

Cheers!  Hans

Hans Boldt, ILE RPG Development, IBM Toronto Lab, boldt@ca.ibm.com