Re: QUSLFLD

[rob@xxxxxxxxx]

And if you are using SQL instead of RPG I/O then it shouldn't be much of a
problem.  But still a good point.  Hopefully all of our vendors will all
drop using DB2/400 and start using nothing but user spaces so that our
interfaces won't fail if they make a layout change in the future :-)


Rob Berendt
--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin



                    Scott Klement
                    <klemscot@klement       To:     rpg400-l@midrange.com
                    s.com>                  cc:
                    Sent by:                Fax to:
                    rpg400-l-admin@mi       Subject:     Re: QUSLFLD
                    drange.com


                    01/04/2002 02:21
                    PM
                    Please respond to
                    rpg400-l







My concern when using QADBIFLD is that IBM could change the format in
a future release, causing the program to stop working..   (Or have they
documented that this won't change?)

You wouldn't have that problem with QUSLFLD...  it's designed so that
they can make changes and still keep things backwards-compatible.

On Fri, 4 Jan 2002 rob@dekko.com wrote:
>
> My stock and standard reply to this is that why use DSPFFD or QUSLFLD
when
> you can use traditional i/o against the file QSYS/QADBIFLD to get this
> information?
>

_______________________________________________
This is the RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries (RPG400-L) mailing list
To post a message email: RPG400-L@midrange.com
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/rpg400-l
or email: RPG400-L-request@midrange.com
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.