|
>> Just so I have this straight. . . I won't get a gain on not using as much memory because it will allocate the defined length even if I only use 1 character ... This is true. Think about what would happen if such a field were truly (constantly) varying in length - and it was in a DS. Where would the next field begin? Where you _would_ save storage is if you put a varying length field out to the database and specified a shorter length for the piece to be kept in the main record. >> That tells me it either hasn't allocated the space or the debugger doesn't understand varying length fields. Any comments on this? Neither I suspect. It probably just means that the compiler has not initialized the storage. The storage must have been allocated, since you can "see" it. If you use %Len to change the length of a varying length field, the compiler will (or at least it used to) blank out the characters beyond the new length. I guess when it moves data in it doesn't bother - just sets the length. Jon Paris Partner400 www.Partner400.com
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
