Re: Defining an array over a group of fields in a file

As I understand it... The issue is not about if\when changes would be made to the layout\record-format of the files, but how the compiler chooses to define the alignment of the declared variables for the fields of the record format. That although the program created by one particular compile may have been verified [e.g. via debug] that the declarations were aligned as contiguous storage, the next compile might not also effect that same contiguous alignment, regardless that the files or most anything else about the source has remained essentially unchanged; i.e. perhaps only a PTF to the compiler has changed, which resulted in the different alignment of the declarative for the fields.

The following example I gave in a CLP to effect an implied contiguous alignment for use in an effective /array/ [though that code is untested because I have only v5r3, and of course CL has no actual array support, but the effect is the equivalent of an array]:
http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l/201301/msg00225.html

Regards, Chuck

On 12 Mar 2013 09:38, TheBorg wrote:

Good point, and I generally agree with the statement you made below,
but in this case I know that the client will never upgrade their JDE
software to a newer version, and these fields have always been
contiguous within the F0902 record, so I'm not concerned about any
file changes. We are currently in the process of converting
everything to SAP...

On 12 Mar 2013 09:00, Vernon Hamberg wrote:

I had used this approach - basing an array on a pointer to the
first of several fields.

However, I've gone away from that. Apparently, there is no
guarantee that the fields will be in the order you expect. So IF it
has worked, this is an accident.

Another DS with the field names in the order you want, and with
the array overlaying them, and no data definitions, forces the
fields to be contiguous, so far as RPG is concerned. <<SNIP>>