Re: ALWNULL(*USRCTL) -- RPG400-L

× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.

Subject: Re: ALWNULL(*USRCTL)
From: "M. Lazarus" <mlazarus@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 20:10:41 -0400
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l>
List-help: <mailto:rpg400-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries <rpg400-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:rpg400-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l>, <mailto:rpg400-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l>, <mailto:rpg400-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

David,

The reason I'm asking the question is because if there's no performance difference then I see no reason to ever use ALWNULL(*INPUTONLY)!

-mark

At 5/19/04 01:29 PM, you wrote:

Try updating a null-capable file specifying ALWNULL(*INPUTONLY) and see
what happens.
----- Original Message -----
message: 2
date: Tue, 18 May 2004 22:33:55 -0400
from: "M. Lazarus" <mlazarus@xxxxxxxx>
subject: ALWNULL(*USRCTL)

  Are there any performance (or other advantages) to using
ALWNULL(*INPUTONLY) vs. ALWNULL(*USRCTL)?

-mark

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow-Ups:

Re: ALWNULL(*USRCTL) , Carel Teijgeler

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.