Are there edit limits on DECLARE GLOBAL?

[Boaz Bezborodko]

I did try using a (200,*,g) and that didn't work in my processing, but 
(100,*,g) did work.

Processing table 1:
::Declare Xvalue(200,*,g)
::Xvalue=<~25 character string>

Precessing table 2:
::Declare Yvalue
::aa(10,*)=GETENV("USERNAME")
::ab(7,.0)=<some number>
::Yvalue=aa{Xvalue{ab

If Xvalue is set to a length of 200 then Yvalue will equal 'aa{Xvalue 
and ab isn't part of it.
If Xvalue is set to a length of 100 then Yvalue will equal the complete  
'aa{Xvalue{ab

I did not change the  program to set a limit for Yvalue simply because 
100 should be good enough for my application and it worked.  But I am 
curious as to what may be the limiting factor.

John Esak wrote:
> I think I see what you're getting at... But why?  Why do you want them
> uncast?  Yes, you have to give them a length just to be able to get the ,g
> attached as well.  Couldn't you just assign them a very huge value, say
> 32,767 (the max length) and put the ,g.  A hundred of these wouldn't even be
> 5 meg of memory?  Aren't we all dealing with 2Gb of memory these days?
>
> John
>  
>
>   
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: filepro-list-bounces+john=valar.com at lists.celestial.com 
>> [mailto:filepro-list-bounces+john=valar.com at lists.celestial.co
>>     
> m] On Behalf Of Boaz Bezborodko
>   
>> Sent: Friday, April 23, 2010 4:04 PM
>> To: Kenneth Brody
>> Cc: filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
>> Subject: Re: Are there edit limits on DECLARE GLOBAL?
>>
>>
>>
>> Kenneth Brody wrote:
>>     
>>> On 4/23/2010 3:26 PM, Boaz Bezborodko wrote:
>>>       
>>>> I am using DECLARE GLOBAL in some of my processing to pass 
>>>>         
>> variables
>>     
>>>> between tables.  Is there a requirement for an edit on 
>>>>         
>> these variables?
>>     
>>>> IOW, can I leave the edit off and have a virtually unlimited length
>>>> variable passed between tables?
>>>>         
>>> ObReply:  "What happened when you tried it?"
>>>
>>>       
>> It works on my input processing table, but fails when used in 
>> a report 
>> processing table.  Without the ',g' in an edit it doesn't keep the 
>> information from one record to the next.  Is there a way around this?
>>
>> Boaz
>> _______________________________________________
>> Filepro-list mailing list
>> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
>> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
>>
>>     
>
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.celestial.com/pipermail/filepro-list/attachments/20100425/f91eb0cb/attachment.html