Re: substr bif question

On 23/09/2009, at 8:20 AM, Dennis Lovelady wrote:

Either IBM changed the way something worked or they did not. Lacking
evidence to the contrary, I'll assume that they've been true to the concept.

Aside from CPYFRMIMPF/CPYTOIMPF just being implemented in a slow and ugly fashion I think Rob's complaint is that CPYFRMIMPF started obeying CCSID 65535 file attributes. In some circumstances the resulting file will be illegible. Although this is an incompatible change in behaviour it could be argued that the previous behaviour was wrong and has now been corrected.

Informational APAR II13784 contains a worked example of the problem caused by the change. It also describes some other incompatible changes which may also be at the core of Rob's complaint.

Looks to me like the original design of CPYFRMIMPF/CPYTOIMPF was crap and these are attempts to correct erroneous behaviour.

VRM540 introduced an additional enhancement for string escape handling.

Search the archives if you want to see the history of the complaints.

Regards,
Simon Coulter.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
FlyByNight Software OS/400, i5/OS Technical Specialists

http://www.flybynight.com.au/
Phone: +61 2 6657 8251 Mobile: +61 0411 091 400 /"\
Fax: +61 2 6657 8251 \ /
X
ASCII Ribbon campaign against HTML E-Mail / \
--------------------------------------------------------------------