Re: Statement gives error in RUNSQLSTM

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

 Hi, Bryce:

If you don't like it, why don't you open a DCR with IBM to suggest that 
the RUNSQLSTM command should check the record length of the source 
physical file, and act accordingly?  Or, provide an optional SCANCOLS(1 
80) parameter, so you can override this as needed or desired?

Many people like to complain about the midrange platform ("The AS/400 
cannot do xxxxx"), yet they never even OPEN A DCR for those issues...

Complaining on these e-mail lists is not the same as opening a DCR.  
Some folks at IBM monitor some of these lists, but this is not the 
proper forum to suggest enhancements or report problems to IBM.  IBM 
already has a formal process in place for that purpose -- PMRs (for 
problems) and DCRs (for design change requests, aka. "enhancements".)   
And, you can now do it all from the web (for several years now.)

Mark S. Waterbury

> On 10/7/2010 9:35 AM, Bryce Martin wrote:
> Grrrrreeeeaaaaat!  haha.  stupid column limits.  That's my biggest
> frustration with this platform, ahering to the old punch card style column
> crap.
>
> Thanks
> Bryce Martin