× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



Hi Mark,

can you post a complete compile-able source from 7.2 that fails on 7.3 - something shortened and maybe best only depending on files that are on every systems.

Then I could check with our 7.3 which is relatively up-to-date, since our admins installed the latest cumulative PTFs last weekend.

I had some problems with likerec on 7.3 too - but those were related to the new extensions likerec(…:*all) and so on - those are still not recognized by the SQL-PC.

Would be glad to help you, but I can’t figure out your special source code configuration where that happens.

Regards,
Daniel

Von meinem iPhone gesendet

Am 15.03.2023 um 21:33 schrieb Mark Murphy <jmarkmurphy@xxxxxxxxx>:

I have found something that may be a bug in 7.3, but I am unsure if it has
been PTFd yet as I can't find a PTF for it. I understand that my Google Fu
for IBM PTF's is weak at best. Here is the issue:

**free

I have a program that compiles fine on 7.2, but fails on 7.3. I can make it
compile on 7.3, but the change I have to make seems to indicate that the
precompiler has lost some flexibility. I have a couple host variables that
are defined with like(). The target of the like is a subfield of a data
structure defined with a likerec(). In 7.2 the order of these definitions
does not seem to matter, in 7.3, it does. If the fields with like() are
defined first in 7.3, I get an SQL0312, in 7.2 it compiles correctly. If
the data structure is defined first on 7.3, it compiles correctly. I didn't
check this scenario on 7.2 because I can't imagine it failing, and I am
sure that I have done that.

Does anyone know of a PTF that might fix this problem? or should I have our
admins report this to IBM? Not that 7.3 is a high priority for correcting
things like this any more, or maybe the change was intentional, but I can't
find any documentation confirming this hypothesis either.
--
This is the RPG programming on IBM i (RPG400-L) mailing list
To post a message email: RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l
or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at https://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.

Please contact support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related questions.


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:
Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

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.