RE: QUERY TO SQL

[Buck Calabro <Buck.Calabro@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>Don't you find it disconcerting that IBM makes
>you do this?

Maybe it's my age, but I don't expect IBM to do anything for me at all!

>Heck, it appears that, with enough work,
>one could print a query definition and
>create the correct matching SQL just
>from that.  Maybe even create a template
>so that it could be done with any query.

If I had a lot of queries to convert, I'd probably write my own tool to do
it, just as you suggest.

>if IBM truly wants to move us to SQL,
>they shouldn't saddle us with half-finished
>tool called RTVQMQRY.

Your point about moving to SQL is interesting.  My earliest recollection of
QMQRY is that it was intended as an API for advanced tool-builders to use to
write their own interface to query.  I may (just may?) be full of hot air,
but I don't think IBM ever intended RTVQMQRY and STRQMQRY to be daily-use
tools like the would like embedded SQL to be.

Perhaps a design change request to enhance RTVQMQRY would let them know that
there's demand!
  --buck