Re: Pointer vs. BIF performance (was: Getting into pointers)

I would assume the pointer version will perform a bit faster (probably
not much).

Note: You might want to replace the way that you get the for loop limit
from %len(%trim(SRCDATA)) to %len(%trimr(SRCDATA)) (may also need to do
a subtract 1 for the pointer version) :).



"David Gibbs" <david@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:<mailman.22543.1250088581.23468.rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>...

This question is mostly out of idle curiosity ...

I've got a simple routine that is designed to replace any 5250 control

characters in a RPG source file with blank.

for p = 1 to %len(%trim(SRCDATA));
if %subst(SRCDATA:p:1) < x'40';
%subst(SRCDATA:p:1) = *blank;
endif;
endfor;

Would there be any performance benefit if I used a pointer to update

the field?

D charPtr S *
D char S 1A based(charPtr)

.
.
.

for p = 0 to %len(%trim(SRCDATA));
charPtr = %addr(SRCDATA)+p;
if char < x'40';
char = *blank;
endif;
endfor;

Thanks!

david

--
IBM i on Power - For when you can't afford to be out of business