Re: PIC S9(11).9(2) USAGE DISPLAY illegal?
From: William M. Klein (wmklein_at_nospam.netcom.com)
Date: 07/29/04
- Next message: Richard: "Re: Layout Hell-o"
- Previous message: Carol: "Re: Layout Hell-o"
- In reply to: Lueko Willms: "PIC S9(11).9(2) USAGE DISPLAY illegal?"
- Next in thread: Lueko Willms: "Re: PIC S9(11).9(2) USAGE DISPLAY illegal?"
- Reply: Lueko Willms: "Re: PIC S9(11).9(2) USAGE DISPLAY illegal?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 19:37:56 GMT
10 CTLGTOTAL-INVOICE-AM PIC -9(11).9(2) USAGE DISPLAY
looks like a reasonable PICTURE clause to me. My *guess* is that there may be a
problem with your trying to do REPLACING on "bits and pieces" of a PICTURE
clause. It is true that with the '85 Standard, "(" and ")" always are treated
as "text-words" so they can be used for dividing parts of a REPLACING - it is
NOT true that "." without a space causes a text-word.
Furthermore, there (used to be?) a question about whether or not the compiler
COULD insert a space in the "new text" when doing REPLACE processing. In other
words,
Replace ==)== by ==)==.
pic 9(1)V9.
could result in
Pic 9(1) V9.
-- Bill Klein wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com "Lueko Willms" <l.willms@jpberlin.de> wrote in message news:9Dl0Wtt9flB@jpberlin-l.willms.jpberlin.de... > > During my exercises with Fujitsu COBOL and my CopyCSV program, I > tried to use a > COPY > REPLACING > --- among other things this: > ==9V9== BY ==9.9== > ==)V9== BY ==).9== > > > According to the program listing, the replacement occured as > wanted, so that the resulting PIC clause was as in the subject line, > but the compiler complained about an "Invalid combination in PICTURE > character string. PICTURE 9 assumed" (error msg JMN1434I-S). > > I had specified a "SIGN IS LEADING SEPARATE" on the group level. > > When I add this other REPLACING clause: > == S9== BY == -9== > > > I get another message: > > > JMN2008I-W WHEN SIGN CLAUSE IS SPECIFIED FOR GROUP ITEM,AT LEAST ONE > SIGNED EXTERNAL DECIMAL ITEM MUST BE SPECIFIED FOR SUBORDINATING > ELEMENTARY ITEM. SIGN CLAUSE IGNORED. > > > But there is, among others, this one, resulting from the REPLACING: > > 10 CTLGTOTAL-INVOICE-AM PIC -9(11).9(2) USAGE DISPLAY. > > > Is the compiler wrong or me? > > > > Yours, > Lüko Willms http://www.mlwerke.de > /--------- L.WILLMS@jpberlin.de -- Alle Rechte vorbehalten -- > > "Es sind nicht die Generäle und Könige, die die Geschichte machen, > sondern die breiten Massen des Volkes" - Nelson Mandela
- Next message: Richard: "Re: Layout Hell-o"
- Previous message: Carol: "Re: Layout Hell-o"
- In reply to: Lueko Willms: "PIC S9(11).9(2) USAGE DISPLAY illegal?"
- Next in thread: Lueko Willms: "Re: PIC S9(11).9(2) USAGE DISPLAY illegal?"
- Reply: Lueko Willms: "Re: PIC S9(11).9(2) USAGE DISPLAY illegal?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|