Check the compile listing to see if the field is being specified as FORMAT
DATE '@Y-%m-%d'. There could also be an entry under special names which
could throw things off. If the format isn't specified with '@Y-%m-%d',
the compiler will treat the dates using the job default--and you cannot
set DATFMT for a job to *ISO (or *USA for that matter).

You may know this, but internally the dates are not stored in a format we
humans would recognize. They are stored as a 10-digit integer. The
system takes care of converting to whatever format is requested at the
time. If you don't specify one, It will default the the job format. At
our shop that's *MDY--perhaps yours is *YMD. In any case, none of the
default job date formats include the 1st of January 0001. Hence, dates as
early as that will cause a data format mapping error.

If the compile listing shows the year portion of the date as something
other than '%y' (lower-case y), then you've got a different problem. an
upper-case Y with either % or @ will work.

cobol400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 11/28/2013 01:00:03 PM:
----- Message from "Tom Hightower" <tomh@xxxxxxxxxxx> on Wed, 27 Nov
2013 17:55:18 -0600 -----


"'COBOL Programming on the IBM i \(AS/400 and iSeries\)'" <cobol400-


Re: [COBOL400-L] *ISO date in COBOL?

The programmer working on it says that she's doing the compile like so:



As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...


Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2021 by and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.