RE: SETLL not working

-----Original Message-----
From: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jon Paris
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 1:10 PM
To: rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: SETLL not working 

 >> 1) Why did the compiler even accept this?  Assuming 
(mykds) was treated
as a single field, shouldn't the compiler have complained 
that mykds was not
the same size as the first key field in the file.

I'm not Barbara but I can answer this one.  The reason is 
that since you are
in /free a list of key fields in parentheses is a perfectly 
legal way to
supply a partial (or indeed full) key.  In fact most people I 
know use this
in preference to %KDS as you can see exactly what key fields 
are in use.

I often do it that way, but in this instance I needed to save the key
between different procedures and a module level %kds seemed like a good
way to do this.

The reason the compiler doesn't complain is that as long as 
the base data
type matches (char/num/date) it will effectively do an eval 
for you into a
temp field that does match the key (first) key field's 
definition, and use
that as the key.  It is one of the features of the new free-form key
support.

I assumed this was the case, as it was the only thing that made sense.
I didn't realize the compiler would do the eval into the temporary.  But
it makes sense as you can use a list of literal values in the same place

If you'd done it in fixed form the compiler would have gotten upset. 

As to your second question I can't see why it would change 
it.  Are you sure
that is all that was changed?

Yep, I'm positive.  That's what's got me scatching my head.

Charles Wilt