Re: Problems with parameters

[Simon Coulter <shc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Saturday, February 28, 2004, at 02:49  PM, ile rpg wrote:

> I understand the theory (but apparently not much else) of CEEDOD; when
>    I've included in in the service program, it tells me that parameter 
> 3 is
>    15 bytes.  But that doesn't seem to do any good.

If you passed 15 bytes then CEEDOD is working. You have to use that 
length in subsequent references. The system won't automatically use 15 
bytes. It will use the 60 bytes you declared.

>    I can work around this problem by always using fields with lengths
>    matching the sizes in the parameter list and procedure interface.  
> But
>    with all the options available, it seems as though there should be 
> a way
>    to code this so the number of bytes returned agrees with the size 
> of the
>    input field passed as the parameter.  On the other hand, it might 
> be a
>    fact of life that the size of the returned parameter is what it is 
> and I
>    have to manage the length/overflow myself.

You have to work with the length CEEDOD returned. The 3rd parameter is 
a pointer capable of addressing 60 bytes but you only passed 15 so you 
must ensure you work with only 15 bytes. Use %SUBST to extract the 
appropriate amount of data from the variable.

Regards,
Simon Coulter.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
   FlyByNight Software         AS/400 Technical Specialists

   http://www.flybynight.com.au/
   Phone: +61 3 9419 0175   Mobile: +61 0411 091 400        /"\
   Fax:   +61 3 9419 0175                                   \ /
                                                             X
                 ASCII Ribbon campaign against HTML E-Mail  / \
--------------------------------------------------------------------