Re: %date not evaluating in DOW as "I" would expect

[Jeff Young <cooljeff913@xxxxxxxxx>]

Bryce,
For the CRTSQLRPGI command, DBGVIEW(*SOURCE) will translate into DBGVIEW(*ALL) when it compiles the expanded source.
 
Jeff Young 
Sr. Programmer Analyst
IBM -e(logo) server Certified Systems Exper - iSeries Technical Solutions V5R2 
IBM  Certified Specialist- e(logo) server i5Series Technical Solutions Designer V5R3
IBM  Certified Specialist- e(logo)server i5Series Technical Solutions Implementer V5R3 
  
 






________________________________
From: Bryce Martin <BMartin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: RPG programming on the IBM i / System i <rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, October 2, 2009 12:05:10 PM
Subject: Re: %date not evaluating in DOW as "I" would expect

CRTSQLRPGI OBJ(BMARTIN/ProgramA) SRCFILE(BMSRC/QRPGLESRC) SRCMBR(ProgramA) 
OBJTYPE(*MODULE) OPTION(*EVENTF) REPLACE(*YES) DBGVIEW(*SOURCE) 
TOSRCFILE(BMARTIN/QSQLTEMP1)

That is the compile command from WDSC7.  They won't let my type *LIST or 
*ALL for the DBGVIEW.  Sooooo... am I using the wrong compile command or 
is this a WDSC limitation?

Thanks
Bryce Martin
Programmer/Analyst I
570-546-4777



Tommy.Holden@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Sent by: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
10/02/2009 11:42 AM
Please respond to
RPG programming on the IBM i / System i <rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>


To
RPG programming on the IBM i / System i <rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
cc

Subject
Re: %date not evaluating in DOW as "I" would expect






personally i always use *LIST  using *SOURCE is like so last decade!!!!


Thanks,
Tommy Holden



From:
Jon Paris <jon.paris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:
rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Date:
10/02/2009 10:09 AM
Subject:
Re: %date not evaluating in DOW as "I" would expect
Sent by:
rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx



One very good reason why I always compile with *ALL or *LIST!  For the 
small additional storage overhead it is not worth sticking with just 
*SOURCE.


Jon Paris

www.Partner400.com
www.SystemiDeveloper.com



On 2-Oct-09, at 10:42 AM, rpg400-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

>   However, I think Scott
> might have gotten it right when he said that my source didn't match my
> object.  I don't know why it wouldn't have,