Dear all,
Thank you for your answers.
IBM recomend us so our programmers make the data validation. Please review
following link below:
http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21238919
Best regards,
K. Zafiropoulos
On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 20:36:04 -0300 Clark Morris [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
:I am not certain if PIC X(n) will allow sign zones on the low order
:byte.
PIC X allows anything.
--
Binyamin Dissen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.dissensoftware.com
Director, Dissen Software, Bar Grill - Israel
Of McKown, John
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 8:40 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Enterprise COBOL v3.4.1 run time issue
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 9:45 AM
To: IBM
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 9:45 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Enterprise COBOL v3.4.1 run time issue
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 08:26:19 -0600, Steve Comstock wrote
: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 8:40 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Enterprise COBOL v3.4.1 run time issue
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 9:45 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
PROTECTED] wrote:
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 9:45 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Enterprise COBOL v3.4.1 run time issue
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 08:26:19 -0600, Steve
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mansell, George R.
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 9:52 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Enterprise COBOL v3.4.1 run time issue
Pack of FOW123 followed by zap and unpack would do this without a data
Hi all,
One of our most curious programmers noticed that when he uses READ or READ
INTO statement to parse alphanumeric data, a translation is made. The value
passed is the arithmetic truncation of the string. For example a
string 'FOW123' is passed with value '666123'. As you can see X'F1' =
K Zafirop wrote:
Hi all,
One of our most curious programmers noticed that when he uses READ or READ
INTO statement to parse alphanumeric data, a translation is made.
I don't believe it. READ transfers bytes of data from an
external source into a memory location unchanged. The only
exception
: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of K Zafirop
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 10:02 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Enterprise COBOL v3.4.1 run time issue
Hi all,
One of our most curious programmers noticed that when he uses READ or
READ INTO statement to parse
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 09:02:26 -0500 K Zafirop [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
:Hi all,
:
:One of our most curious programmers noticed that when he uses READ or READ
:INTO statement to parse alphanumeric data, a translation is made. The value
:passed is the arithmetic truncation of the string. For
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of K Zafirop
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 9:02 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Enterprise COBOL v3.4.1 run time issue
Hi all,
One of our most curious programmers noticed that when
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 08:26:19 -0600, Steve Comstock wrote:
K Zafirop wrote:
The value
passed is the arithmetic truncation of the string. For example a
string 'FOW123' is passed with value '666123'.
I'm confused here. How can the string 'FOW123' have a value '666123'?
The string is its value.
Doubt the Read is involved. Look at the move code for this field
generated by the complier. Pics?
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 08:26:19 -0600, Steve Comstock wrote:
K Zafirop wrote:
The value
passed is the arithmetic truncation of the string. For example a
string 'FOW123' is passed with value
As others have indicated, I (mostly) doubt that the READ (rather than READ
INTO) is doing ANY manipulation of data. The one possible exception is if
you have the 01-level under the FD defined as a numeric or edited field -
and even then, I doubt that conversion takes place. (The other exception
15 matches
Mail list logo
