RE: SQL VS QUERY

[Evan Harris <spanner@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Tom

I was only referring to the column editing and formatting you can do with
query - perhaps my choice of words was bad and "report layout options"
would have been more accurate.

If you have used Query/400 then I'm sure that you know what those options
are. Some clever effects can be obtained by forcing line wrapping and using
the "spaces before" value to line fields up. My experience is that quickly
knocking up a reasonably laid out report is usually an easy job.

My experience with QM Forms was enough to make me give up in frustration
although that is now a long time in the past - at the time I was unable to
locate a reference that was helpful. If there is a good redbook or manual
with examples I am more than wiling to go back and look at it again.

I do like the fact that I can rely on QM Query to be available as not every
customer has Query/400

Regards
Evan Harris


> Evan:
>
> It's been years since I've done much with Query/400 (pretty much ever
> since I first learned about QM queries), so I'm not familiar with the
> 'report layout tools' that are available through Query/400.
>
> My experience was that QM forms provided a better output specification
> capability than Query/400. Maybe Query/400 has advanced. Can you describe
> a couple significant advantages that Query/400 has?
>
> Tom Liotta
>
> midrange-l-request@midrange.com wrote:
>
> >  11. Re: SQL VS QUERY (Evan Harris)
> >
> >you don't consider the report layout tools an advantage ?
> >
> >
> >>[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
> >>The only advantage that Query ever had over SQL was the ability to direct
> >>mail merge with OV/400.  Since OV/400 went the way of the dodo bird that
> >>is not a concern anymore.  When you have SQL you also get STRQM.  Which
> >>can be configured to work like Query, or like SQL.