Re: SCAN vs %scan

[Vern Hamberg <vhamberg@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Steve

Got it - I actually like to use the SQL REPLACE best - the new 
%scnreplace BIF will probably be my choice when I can get there - 
%replace does only one instance - SQL REPLACE does every instance it 
finds in the string - makes things a lot easier.

Regards
Vern

On 1/10/2012 8:56 PM, sjl wrote:
> Vern -
> I am replacing the string if the scan is successful.  You must not have seen
> my reply to Chuck.
> - sjl
>
>
>
> "Vern Hamberg"  wrote in message
> news:mailman.3434.1326223784.2619.rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx...
>
> I like the REPLACE function, too - but I don't see that Steve wants to
> replace anything - he's only trying to find something - unless he
> mentions replacing later in the thread.
>
> Someone else mentioned the main difference between them is that SCAN
> returns the position of all instances in an array, while %scan returns
> only the first instance that exists after the start position. I really
> like what SCAN does and wish it would be brought back into free-form.
>
> If he only wants to know that a string is somewhere in a field, and
> doesn't need to know all of them, a SELECT using the POSSTR function is
> good, too. Or LOCATE, I think.
>
> On 1/10/2012 8:24 AM, Rick.Chevalier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > Have you thought about using the SQL REPLACE function?  If 'Abc' is always
> > going to be replaced with 'ABC' in every record maybe it would be faster
> > to use SQL and operate on the records as a set.