Re: QSRLSAVF format SAVF0100 -- 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.

Bob,

The point is that with length notation the correctness of a subfield depends on the correctness of other subfields and that is an unnecessary dependence. With position notation all the information is in one line. I like Carsten's suggestion; it uses length notation and is independent as well.

Joep Beckeringh

Bob Cozzi wrote:

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

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.