RE: data structure has no valid subfields

Agreed: a reference manual is not a teaching manual and vice versa.

I guess my disappointment with the output only fields is grounded in my own
agenda--to use a data structure that I didn't have to code each subfield in
to pass information back and forth between two programs. Just like one based
on a database file.  I can do it, now I'll have to get rid of the
underlines.  <g>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Buck Calabro [mailto:Buck.Calabro@commsoft.net]
> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 3:50 PM
> To: rpg400-l@midrange.com
> Subject: RE: data structure has no valid subfields
>
>
> Joel said:
>
> >In section 2.2.5.2.20 Initializing Output/Input
> >Fields, it says: "Output-only fields are not part
> >of the input buffer unless they are part of a
> >subfile record, in which case they are saved
> >as if they were output/input fields."
> >
> >I'm not sure how someone would have hit on
> >that section.
>
> Having some vanishingly small experience writing manuals, I
> can only say
> that a reference manual can't be a good teacher AND a
> reference manual.  Nor
> can a teaching manual be a good reference.  The Application Display
> Programming guide is intended to be a teaching manual, and is
> meant to be
> read cover to cover.  The debate on the quality of the
> education is outside
> the scope of this note, but suffice it to say that many fine
> people have
> made a good living teaching the concepts laid out there.
>
> >Let me get this straight--Is it safe to say
> >that only file fields that make it to a
> >program's input buffer will show up in an
> >externally defined data structure?
>
> While not an expert, I would say that's been my experience.
>
> >Are there other situations like this one with
> >display files?
>
> None that immediately come to mind.
>
> >"Aberration" is a nice temperate term.
>
> My original "take" on this concept was a wild snort.  I think
> I said "If I
> wanted those fields in the input buffer I would have made
> them 'both' fields
> and DSPATR(PR)."
>
> >I'm assuming this is a holdover from
> >the days when bandwidth constraints
> >were a lot more important.
>
> I never got a good answer, alas.
>   --buck
>
NOTICE:
All e-mail sent to or from this e-mail address will be received or otherwise
recorded by The Sharper Image corporate e-mail system and is subject to
archival, monitoring, review by and/or disclosure to Sharper Image security
and other management.  This message is intended only for the use of the
addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential.
If you are not the intended recipient, dissemination of this communication
is prohibited.