× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



Have you looked at the FIND-DURATION intrinsic function in COBOL - that should be usable for this purpose.

COMPUTE W-DAYS =
FUNCTION FIND-DURATION (W-DTDSCH W-DTPAID DAYS).

John Arnold
jarnold@xxxxxxxx
301-354-2939 phone
301-354-2999 fax

Please note my new email address - jarnold@xxxxxxxx

This transmission may include confidential health information that is protected by law. This information is intended for the use of the listed recipients only. If you are not listed as a recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure or distribution of this information is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient of this information, please notify the sender immediately to arrange for the return or destruction of the information.

-----Original Message-----
From: COBOL400-L [mailto:cobol400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of CRPence
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 11:24 AM
To: COBOL400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [COBOL400-L] how to handle date comparison

On 09-Aug-2016 14:08 -0500, Stone, Joel wrote:
In COBOL, what is a good method of comparing a data field date to the
current date?

It seems that ALL data fields must be declared to appear with a
separator character.

And it seems that the CURRENT-DATE function cannot return a date
separator.

Is it mandatory to break apart the current date, and string it back
together with a separator?

Surely there must be an easier way to write something like:

If Cust-add-date = ws-curr-date

where Cust-add-date is type "L" format *MDY

without breaking apart and rebuilding the current date?


Is use of the Conversion Options (CVTOPT) *DATE directive on the compile [e.g. on a Create Bound COBOL Program (CRTBNDCBL)] to tell the compiler that the /field/ "date data types are declared as category
*date* COBOL data-items" sufficient? That text for the *DATE directive would seem to imply that the field having been data-typed as *date*, that comparisons with the fields should be done for the value of the date rather than with the value of the formatted character-string that would be used for presentation; i.e. the form that is used for the presentation of or the inputting of, a date value, is a value that is programmer\user-readable, rather than an internal form used for comparisons and collations -- similar to how an integer-data-type is presented as and input as, alpha-digits, despite not being stored as alpha-digits.

--
Regards, Chuck

--
This is the COBOL Programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries) (COBOL400-L) mailing list To post a message email: COBOL400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/cobol400-l
or email: COBOL400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/cobol400-l.


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:
Replies:

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

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com 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.