Date *HIVAL was Urgent!!! NULLS & ZEROS

Oh, yes.  But it is becoming a standard to store dates in a
date variable, just because they will do so much for us that
numeric variables won't.

I think that storing a date as *HIVAL in a date field which
would produce 9999-12-31 would be just as good as using
99999999 in a numeric field.

I don't really think we have to worry about the Y10K bug
just yet.

personally, I use *LOVAL of 0001-01-01 because it just
looks more like an empty date than 9999-12-31 does.

Regards,

Jim Langston

Raul Jager wrote:

> In a numeric variable, that is later used as CCYYMMDD you can store
> 99999999, but do advise agist it becuause you will get error if you try
> to convert it or move it to a date field, in order to do DATE
> Arithmetic.

<SNIP>

+---
| 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
+---