RE: Field Parsing Style

I think I agree with everyone else who responded, if the structure layout is
fixed, it will not change, I would go with a Data Structure, as it
explicitly defines the layout of the data.

If, however, the layout can every change, I would go with the %SubSt method.

An interesting point is a file trigger.  He header information stays fixed,
but the offsets of the data record, and the data record itself depending on
the file being triggered, changes.  I wind up using 2 data structures, one
for the header information, and one based on a pointer.  When I get the
offset to the record, I point the pointer to it.  No %SubSt needed and
explicit record descriptions.

Regards,

Jim Langston

-----Original Message-----
From: Feador, Jerry [mailto:JFeador@Kiausa.com]

Hi All,

Just a style question.

The "standards" here say to always use a Data Structure to parse a field,
yet I think it's more explanatory, at the line of code view, to %SubSt the
information out.

Are there any arguments one way or the other, besides readability? Speed?
Data integrity?

Thanks for your time,
Capt.j