|
Joe, I probably am misinterpreting your message when you say "people insist on getting away from it (rpg)" and "my 5-line, two-program solution beats your 100-line, 3 object technique any day of the week" but maybe you missed this in my message -- "I would consider moving the rank to another file and updating it from a short (but not four line) trigger written in RPG." I agree that SQL is not the solution here and that the statement that Bruce posted was a bad fit for the problem. I am also not implying OPNQRYF or RPG are bad, just that they no more fit the problem than SQL. I don't think that the overhead of SQL is that much different than OPNQRYF. As for UDF's, the complexity is hidden by the UDF interface; this is a good thing! The advantage is that it is accessed through a well defined interface that is easy to use and promotes reuse. OPNQRY does not facilitate reuse and the interface is not as widely understood. For one time use I would consider OPNQRYF, if I need to use something more than once I would use SQL. I still wouldn't use either in this case unless this is just the last step in a batch process. David Morris >>> joepluta@PlutaBrothers.com 01/29/02 03:31PM >>> > From: David Morris > > Joe, > > I agree that this is not a good place to use SQL, but for > the same reason, OPNQRYF and a four line RPG program > are just as bad. You can easily do what you describe using > SQL and an RPG UDF or even SQL and an SQL UDF in > a single pass. The problem is that it is not dynamic and will > have to be rerun when data is changed in the file. I would > consider moving the rank to another file and updating it from > a short (but not four line) trigger written in RPG. > > Check out the message I posted earlier to see how you > could construct and create that UDF. Why are OPNQRYF and an RPG program bad, David? The SQL statement was bad because it has a lot of overhead and is difficult to understand. OPNQRYF and an RPG program, on the other hand, are very straightforward and perform very well. As to the UDF, why is a 100 line UDF (not counting comments) - which in turn is used to generate a module, a service program and UDF function - a better answer than a single-line OPNQRYF and a 4-line RPG program? What if you need a different ranking - say an alphabetical sequence number? You need a new UDF! And you STILL have to write the SQL statement that uses the UDF. RPG is an excellent language for doing database I/O. Why people insist on "getting away from it" is beyond my meager intellectual capabilities. Maybe it's "new-itis". In the early part of my career, I was bitten by the "newest is best" bug and every time I learned a new technique, I applied it to every situation, whether it needed it or not. But as I've gotten older and lazier, I've learned that while you shouldn't use a hammer to screw in a screw, it's still the best tool in the toolbelt for pounding in a nail. In fact, even though there are situations where a powered nailgun does the job better, for many simple jobs, the old-fashioned claw hammer, as inelegant and unsexy as it may be, is still the best tool for the job. I dunno, but I think my 5-line, two-program solution beats your 100-line, 3 object technique any day of the week.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
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.