|
If this is a frequently used procedure and you are on V7.1 or later I
would suggest adding RTNPARM to the return value definition. The size of
field thou are returning right now is on the large side and will not
perform anywhere near as well as if you use this option.
Also the “field” being returned seems an odd size - is it perhaps a DS?
If so, defining the parm as LikeDs and using a Template for the DS would
give you a more bullet proof approach as any changes to the returned field
would be automatically be reflected without having to re-calc the size.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.