RE: QSRLSAVF format SAVF0100

I understand that issue, it shifts everything up X bytes.
But the OVERLAY keyword can often resolve that issue, but why might you
comment-out a subfield in an API DS anyway? Certainly during testing this
may occur, but not during production. And anyway if you did, it may be
because you inserted too many fields or a duplicate. So you comment it out
and now, assuming from-to column notation, you have to adjust every single
subfield that follows it.
My philosophy on this is to only use length-notation and look at from-to
columns as nearly the same style coding as conditioning indicators EXCEPT in
the situation when you've /COPY'd the code from QSYSINC or elsewhere (that
is, from someone else's code base). Sure it would work, but do you really
want to do that? 

-Bob


-----Original Message-----
From: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Joep Beckeringh
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 5:33 PM
To: RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries
Subject: Re: QSRLSAVF format SAVF0100

Bob Cozzi wrote:
> Oh, and you might want to try to avoid using the "B" data types for the
> subfields, that's a little like using conditioning indicators. Use "I"
data
> types instead and try to use length notation instead of from-to columns.
> -Bob

Bob,

I don't think it is a very good idea to use length notation for an API data 
structure. The layout is not defined by the programmer, but by IBM, so you 
better have your positions right. Imagine using length notation and
commenting 
one line out.

Joep Beckeringh
-- 
This is the RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries (RPG400-L) mailing list
To post a message email: RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l
or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.