RE: Compile error - why?

> From: Jim Langston
>
> You are saying, no, don't do that, move it into a temp variable and
> then move it to the varying, and that's where there would have to be
> a special exception case set up for moving date variables, and the
> length of the varying length field would wind up getting modified
> anyway.

I didn't want to do this, but I'm not communicating properly.  I'll try one
more time.

I did not want the length of the varying field to change.  Absolutely not.
Just move the date into working storage, then move that working storage into
the varying field using standard varying field rules.  If the variable field
is currently not long enough, truncate.  If it's too long, right or left
justify the date in the field.  I'm sorry I didn't communicate that clearly
enough.  I hope I did so this time.

Anyway, this is absolutely my last post on the topic.  My point had less to
do with the mechanics of the operation than with the thought processes
behind the decision making.  I want to make clear again that the RPG
compiler team has done phenomenal work in the last few years, and I was only
bringing up a philosophical point on feature choosing that just happened to
be exemplified by this particular instance.

I am not saying they're wrong for not doing what I suggested, just wanted to
get my opinion on record about factors to consider when choosing features.

Joe