Re: Use SQL to load an Array

Could you not make your arrDS based on a pointer, and allocate the number
of rows (bytes) needed at run time based on count(*) or something like
that?

Mark Walter
Paragon Consulting Services, Inc.
IBM Certified System i Specialist
717-764-7909 Ext. 26
mwalter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.paragon-csi.com



"Joe D" <nike@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
03/03/2008 11:22 AM
Please respond to
RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries <rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>


To
"RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries" <rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
cc

Subject
Re: Use SQL to load an Array






----- Original Message -----

From: "David FOXWELL" <David.FOXWELL@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries" <rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 12:34 AM
Subject: RE: Use SQL to load an Array

I didn't quite understand where you get the compile error SQL5011 from.
Where was the dim(%elem(arrds) coded ?

I was receiving this error when the array DS used on the Fetch Into was
defined in the D-Specs like this:
D arrDs ds likeds(otherDs) dim(%elem(otherDs))

The SQL procompiler does not resolve deep enough to determine how many
elements were defined in otherDs, so it throws an exception when you try
to
do a multi-row fetch into the new DS (arrDs). Because it does not resolve

the %elem() it does not see arrDs as an array at all, so no multirow Fetch

is allowed.

Also, this is the first time I've seen something like : fetch c1 for 50
rows into :arrDs; Does the number of rows have to be hard - coded?

I do not think the number of rows needs to be hard-coded for the program
to
work. If you do not limit the returned row count you would probably
(hopefully?) get some sort of runtime exception if the array were
overflowed. By hard-coding a number that is higher than I ever anticipate

needing I have ensured myself of avoiding the overflow error. However, if

my future need assessment proves to be faulty, hardcoding has now created
an
invisible bug: If there were 57 rows of matching data, I would only get
the
first 50 back and there would be no exception raised.

JD