Re: Sqlrpgle problem

[Mark S Waterbury <mark.s.waterbury@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi, Jon:

Thanks for clarifying  that. (I should have  referred to my RPG IV 
reference before replying.)

Mark

> On 2/25/2017 2:53 PM, Jon Paris wrote:
> I thought that the problem was the Int definition - but that just shows that my brain is not working!  Duh - so OP please ignore my earlier response.
>
>
> As to Mark's comment - I'm not sure about that.  %Lookup (unlike the old LOOKUP opcode) _can_ use a binary search but I think it will only do so if Ascend or Descend is specified for the array definition.
>
> I'm not sure if this is a compiler bug or if it relates to a "feature" of intermediate results that I am not familiar with - hopefully Barbara can clarify.
>
> If you separate the subtraction from the %Lookup return value it works fine. %Lookup returns zero as it should.
>
> It is not clear to me why the OP wants -1 when zero is a valid "not there" response and of course all the lookup results will be one less than they should be but I assume he has his own reason. So rewriting the code like this:
>
> ld = %lookup(*blanks:fieldord);
> ld -= 1;
>
> Works just fine.
>
>
> Jon Paris
>
> www.partner400.com
> www.SystemiDeveloper.com