Re: Defining DS to retrieve variable length data from API

["Rory Hewitt" <roryhewitt@xxxxxxxxx>]

I understand the first point (even though I'd like to think my naming is
sufficiently understandable that it's pretty easy to correlate field names
to the textual names in the documentation), but as for skipping meaningless
fields, I just don't bother naming them, so they're effectively skipped
anyway...

On 6/29/07, Barbara Morris <bmorris@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Rory Hewitt wrote:
> >
> > First, why are you defining the subfields as being overlays of another
> > subfield? Why not simply define them as e.g.:
> > ...
> > It's a lot simpler and easier to read, I think. There's no reason to use
> > overlays (just like there isn't really a reason to name reserved fields
> in
> > RPGLE, so I leave them blank). It's all just style, though, since both
> > methods work fine.
> >
>
> For API receiver variables, I like to use overlays because it makes it
> easy to correlate the data structure to the documentation, and it makes
> it easy to skip fields you don't care about.
>
> D RCVM0100        DS         65535    Qualified
> D   BytesRtn                    10I 0 Overlay(RCVM0100:1)
> D   BytesAvail                  10I 0 Overlay(RCVM0100:5)
> D   MsgID                        7A   Overlay(RCVM0100:13)
> D   RplDtaLenRtn                10I 0 Overlay(RCVM0100:45)
> D   RplDtaLenAvl                10I 0 Overlay(RCVM0100:49)