Re: SORTA and Data Structure Arrays

[Hans Boldt <boldt@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Bob cozzi wrote:

> Is this a "what's wrong with this picture" problem?  
> Sorry, couldn't resist. <g>
>
> To answer your question: SortA does not and probably will never sort data
> structures.
> The new %SORT() built-in function will sort data structure arrays, however
> that won't be out until (at least) V5.3. The cool thing about %SORT() is
> that IBM may be able to include the data structure subfield sort
> capabilities, and I'm hoping they will, so you could do something like this:
>   %sort(myDS : 'A' : NumElems : 'QTYORD')
>
> Where myDS is the data structure array or array name; 'A' is either 'A' or
> 'D' for Ascending or Descending; NumElems is the max number of elements to
> sort, and 'QTYORD' represents the data structure subfield name that will be
> used to sort the data structure. 
> ...  

Bob: You're dreaming. There's no %SORT() built-in function in V5R3.

What V5R3 *will* have is a minor enhancement to opcode SORTA, which will 
allow a fully-qualified name as the Extended-Factor-2 argument. 
(Currently, only an old-style Factor-2 argument is allowed.) Thus, you 
can sort array subfields of nested qualified data structures. For example:

      SORTA DS(I).SUBF(J).ARRAY;

In addition, you will also be able to sort partial arrays using the new 
%SUBARR() built-in. For example, to sort just the first 10 elements of 
an array, you could code:

      SORTA %SUBARR(ARRAY:1:10);

(Bob, you'll be happy to hear that these will work in fixed-form calcs, 
as well as free-form! ;-) )

I agree 110% that there's a need for SORTA (and also %LOOKUP) to handle 
array data structures. But first we have to decide on a syntax for 
specifying which subfield to use as the sort key. It may happen 
eventually, but not for V5R3.

Cheers! Hans