RE: Varying - Inz mandatory?

 >> Just so I have this straight. . .  I won't get a gain on not using as
much memory because it will allocate the defined length even if I only use 1
character ...

This is true.  Think about what would happen if such a field were truly
(constantly) varying in length - and it was in a DS.  Where would the next
field begin?  Where you _would_ save storage is if you put a varying length
field out to the database and specified a shorter length for the piece to be
kept in the main record.

 >> That tells me it either hasn't allocated the space or the debugger
doesn't understand varying length fields.  Any comments on this?

Neither I suspect.  It probably just means that the compiler has not
initialized the storage.  The storage must have been allocated, since you
can "see" it.  If you use %Len to change the length of a varying length
field, the compiler will (or at least it used to) blank out the characters
beyond the new length.  I guess when it moves data in it doesn't bother -
just sets the length.

Jon Paris
Partner400
www.Partner400.com