|
> 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 1997-2025 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.