× 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: Named Indicators...
  • From: boldt@xxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 08:05:08 -0400



Tim wrote:
>I have in the past used named indicators in this way.
>
>0020.00 d InPtr           s               *   inz(%addr(*in))
>0021.00 d  Indicators     ds                  Based(InPtr)
>0023.00 d   ReqCtl_SflDsp...
>0024.00 d                                 n   Overlay(Indicators:81)
>0025.00 d   ReqCtl_SflClr...
>0026.00 d                                 n   Overlay(Indicators:82)
>0027.00 d   ReqCtl_SflEnd...
>0028.00 d                                 n   Overlay(Indicators:83)
>
>But I could not get the %addr to work with indicator based function
>keys(INKA-KY).   I tried %addr(*ink) but that didn't do the trick, and I did
>notice that around position 101 or so, the *ink were triggering values
>there, but I didn't want to write code that was I couldn't find
>documentation in softcopy for...
>
>I know I can map a normal *indicator such as *in03 to functionkey3 and
>define the DDS to make the function key3 to trigger *in03, but I wanted to
>use the reserved values of *inka-y.
>
>Thanks, tim

First, rather than defining a DS based on a pointer initialized
to the address of *IN, why not use the INDDS keyword to get a
set of indicators that won't conflict with the *IN indicators?

But to address your specific question, of course %ADDR(*INK)
doesn't work, but %ADDR(*INKA) does.  You are right that you
shouldn't assume anything about the layout of the indicators in
storage.  The safest way is to use several scalar indicator
fields, each based on a pointer initialized to each *INKx
indicator you want to use.

Actually, the present layout of indicators in storage is not
likely to change for this particular RPG IV implementation.  So
you'd probably be safe assuming that the 24 *INKx indicators
are consecutive.  But please don't make any assumptions about
relative positions of groups of indicators.  Ie., don't take
advantage of the fact that the *INKx indicators seem to be at a
particular position relative to *IN01.

Cheers!  Hans

Hans Boldt, ILE RPG Development, IBM Toronto Lab, boldt@ca.ibm.com


+---
| This is the RPG/400 Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...


Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

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.