|
> Imagine for a moment: > > cf chain (custno: acctno: date) mastfile > >or even: > > cf chain (prodno: 'X' + subcode(n+14)) mastfile > >In other words, full expressions coded directly as key fields >for the keyed I/O operations! > >So todays questions are: Would you take advantage of this if >available? Would you still use KLISTs? I would use the new way and stop using KLISTs because: 1. I would not have to look for my KLIST definition to see what fields that I'm using to access the file. Saves time. 2. I would not have to move fields from one to another in order to use them on a chain like a KLIST forces you to do. This concept makes sense to me. I like it. Joe Teff * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * This is the RPG/400 Discussion Mailing List! To submit a new * * message, send your mail to "RPG400-L@midrange.com". To unsubscribe * * from this list send email to MAJORDOMO@midrange.com and specify * * 'unsubscribe RPG400-L' in the body of your message. Questions should * * be directed to the list owner / operator: david@midrange.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
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.