dummy fields

[Bruce Easton]

  On 10/19/10 10:59 AM, Kenneth Brody wrote:
> On 10/19/2010 10:09 AM, Fairlight wrote:
>> Are dummy fields shared between processing tables that are CALL/CHAINed?  I
>> suspect yes to CHAIN but no to CALL.  I need to know what the real deal is.
>>
>> Also, what about during calls to tables in other files?
> Dummy fields that are declared in the automatic processing table will be
> shared among all processing tables(*).  Those that are not, are not shared
> at all.
>
> (*) The exception, of course, being those called via "CALL NOAUTO".
>
One thing I've noticed about using dummies in called tables (where the 
call is to another file), is that, depending on how you use the dummy 
field there, you may need to redefine it to get it to pass syntax 
check.  This depends on what you're doing with the dummy field there and 
whether or not it is declared in the automatic table for that file.  In 
other words, when syntax checking the table, cabe seems to be  only 
looking between the called table and the automatic table in the same 
file as the called table, whereas clerk is only looking between the 
called table and the automatic table from the calling file.   I'm not 
100% sure of this, but it sure seems that way.  Maybe Ken can confirm this.

I know it has sometimes been problematic when a table (input or called) 
is not tokenized against an intended alternate auto table.  (Where a 
dummy field is defined differently or even missing in the unintended 
auto table.)  But regarding the behavior I noted in the first paragraph 
(if true), I don't see a way to reference a calling file with cabe as in:

~fp/rcabe <prclibraryfile> <prcname> -y <callingfile/callingfileautoprc>

but maybe I missed something...

Since I'm primarily defining web apps these days, I'm almost always 
using long vars for
processing.

Bruce

Bruce Easton
STN, Inc.