Re: Possible intereting SETLL behavior -- RPG400-L

Subject: Re: Possible intereting SETLL behavior
From: Booth Martin <booth@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 13:40:11 -0600
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l/>
List-help: <mailto:rpg400-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: "RPG programming on the IBM i \(AS/400 and iSeries\)" <rpg400-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:rpg400-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l>, <mailto:rpg400-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/options/rpg400-l>, <mailto:rpg400-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

Is there confusion between SETLL and SETLT? Should SetLowerLimits affect the %found indicator? My understanding of SETLL is that the file marker is positioned at a point just below the requested Limit but no attempt is made by that instruction to read a record?

On 12/8/2015 1:28 PM, Vernon Hamberg wrote:
...

It does still seem odd that SETLL 0 file; for an arrival-sequence file
sets %found() to *off - there ARE records whose RRN > 0 (18 of them in
the file I'm reading), and this satisfies the definition of SETLL,
unless there is some unspoken special processing here.

Vern

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow-Ups:

RE: Possible intereting SETLL behavior , Steve Stevens

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2025 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.