RE: SQL vs. traditional I/O? -- MIDRANGE-L

× 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.

Subject: RE: SQL vs. traditional I/O?
From: "Jon Paris" <Jon.Paris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 13:18:13 -0400
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l>
List-help: <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:midrange-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

 >> Here's a "radical" idea ..... SQL pre-processor "smart enough" to
recognize .....

Mark - it took the SQL team from V4R2 to V5R3 to even get close to handling
_most_ of the stuff you can do with RPG IV - and even then the new stuff
(V5R2 and R3) is not supported.  I think you and I will be drawing our
pensions before they catch up with RPG let alone make the pre-processor do
"magic"!  <huge grin>

Jon Paris
Partner400
www.Partner400.com

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow-Ups:

Re: SQL vs. traditional I/O? , Pat Barber

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.