RE: SQL DDL Vs DDS (was Re: Field Reference File (was SQL vs.traditional I/O?))

I agree, having the LABEL ON be integrated directly with the CREATE TABLE
would be nice.  But at least in SQL you can do it all in one RUNSQLSTM
member.  There's no way in DDS to put the ADDPFCST in the same member as
the table/column definitions.


Rob Berendt
--
Group Dekko Services, LLC
Dept 01.073
PO Box 2000
Dock 108
6928N 400E
Kendallville, IN 46755
http://www.dekko.com


|-----------------------------+-------------------------------------------|
|   "John Taylor"             |                                           |
|   <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx|                                           |
|   m>                        |                                         To|
|   Sent by:                  |                                  "'Midrang|
|   midrange-l-bounces@midrang|                                  e Systems|
|   e.com                     |                                  Technical|
|                             |                                  Discussio|
|   07/23/2004 06:56 PM       |                                  n'"      |
|                             |                                  <midrange|
|         Please respond to   |                                  -l@midran|
|         Midrange Systems    |                                  ge.com>  |
|       Technical Discussion  |                                         cc|
|      <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxx|                                           |
|                m>           |                                    Subject|
|                             |                                  RE: SQL  |
|                             |                                  DDL Vs   |
|                             |                                  DDS (was |
|                             |                                  Re: Field|
|                             |                                  Reference|
|                             |                                  File (was|
|                             |                                  SQL      |
|                             |                                           |
|                             |                                  vs.tradit|
|                             |                                  ional    |
|                             |                                  I/O?))   |
|                             |                                           |
|                             |                                           |
|                             |                                           |
|                             |                                           |
|                             |                                           |
|                             |                                           |
|-----------------------------+-------------------------------------------|






>
> To the best of my knowledge, the three outstanding "nasties"
> with SQL DDL Vs DDS are:-
>
> 1. Cannot define a combined view/index.
> 2. Cannot define EDTCDE or EDTWRD (I agree Jim, saves a LOT
> of time) 3. Cannot define a seperate Format name
>
> Anybody care to add to the list?

4. Cannot include the column text with the column definition. You need a
separate "LABEL ON" statement, which is stupid..stupid..stupid.


John Taylor

--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.