|
Doug: Though several replies tried to explain prefixing, yours addressed my actual confusion for this particular issue. (Yes, I've prefixed field names for some 30 odd years going back to RPG -- yes, RPG, on a S/360 -- though I tend not to, mostly agreeing with Rob's comments.) It just seemed odd to go through the exercise of prefixing and then drop the prefix at runtime. The fact that you now must deal with existing field names in existing files clarifies. Tom ----- Original Message ----- From: rpg400-l-request@midrange.com > My problem stems from the fact my PF's use unique fields names, which I feared > could inihibit EVALC from matching subfield names. If we had qualified DS all > along, my PF's would not have used unique field names. -- __________________________________________________________ Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
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.
midrange.com
