RE: RPG400-L Digest, Vol 3, Issue 231

[Rich Duzenbury <rduz-midrange@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 2004-03-26 at 21:08, John Brandt Sr. wrote:
> I don't use BIF's for file access.

Come again?  Looks like the code below is trying to test for success
with %FOUND.  Chain and %FOUND work OK together.  READE and %FOUND do
not.  READE only sets %EOF.  

Therefore, the code below will probably not produce the results you
desire.  


> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rich Duzenbury [mailto:rduz-midrange@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 7:43 PM
> To: RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries
> Subject: RE: RPG400-L Digest, Vol 3, Issue 231
> 
> 
> On Fri, 2004-03-26 at 16:33, John Brandt Sr. wrote:
> > I've already corrected the %Eof and %Found statement.
> > 
> > Is this simple enough for everyone? (If not, the next one will have
> > indicators in it)
> > 
> > C     myklist       chain     myfile
> > C                   dow       not %Found
> > C                   eval      rrn = rrn + 1
> > C                   write     mysubfile
> > C     myklist       reade     myfile    
> > C                   end
> Sorry to trouble you, but you still have an important problem.  %FOUND
> is not set by the READE opcode. %FOUND is only set in the
> context of a file operation by CHAIN, DELETE, SETGT, SETLL.  Therefore,
> you still have the possibility of an infinite loop with this code.
> 
> An earlier poster already gave you the answer, which is to abandon the 
> chain/reade combo if you wish to use BIF's, and go with SETLL/READE opcode
> pairs.
> 
> I don't mind indicator code, I'm used to seeing it.
> 

--
Regards,
Rich

Current Conditions in Des Moines, IA
Overcast
Temp 64.4F
Winds out of the Southeast at 12mph