Home > Archive > Cobol > October 2005 > Initialize
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
| rockocubs 2005-09-27, 6:55 pm |
| Can someone settle an argument for me. Does a initialize on an 01 level
move spaces to pic x fields and zeroes to pic 9 fields or does it move
spaces to the whole 01 level?
| |
| Chuck Stevens 2005-09-27, 6:55 pm |
| "When the statement is written without the REPLACING phrase, data items of
the categories alphabetic, alphanumeric and alphanumeric edited are set to
spaces; data items of category numeric and numeric edited are set to zeroes.
...." (ANSI X3.23-1985 page VI-93, 6.17, The INITIALIZE statement, General
Rule 5.)
This doesn't address what your particular implementation actually DOES, but
it does address what the '85 standard says it OUGHT TO DO.
Note that index data items and elementary FILLER data items in the record
aren't affected by INITIALIZE at all, and note also that if an item has a
VALUE clause it isn't "re-applied" by INITIALIZE.
The 2002 standard adds "WITH FILLER" and "TO VALUE" syntax to INITIALIZE to
provide for these issues.
-Chuck Stevens
"rockocubs" <rphipps@nospam.indy.rr.com> wrote in message
news:175c3e3def2daf1a23aa674f5b3adf87@lo
calhost.talkaboutprogramming.com...
> Can someone settle an argument for me. Does a initialize on an 01 level
> move spaces to pic x fields and zeroes to pic 9 fields or does it move
> spaces to the whole 01 level?
>
| |
| Chuck Stevens 2005-09-27, 6:55 pm |
| I neglected to point out that INITIALIZE behavior is the same as a series of
MOVE statements, one for each (named) elementary item in the record, even if
circumstances (and the implementor's cleverness) allows the initialization
to take place using a single transfer of data from somewhere.
-Chuck Stevens
"rockocubs" <rphipps@nospam.indy.rr.com> wrote in message
news:175c3e3def2daf1a23aa674f5b3adf87@lo
calhost.talkaboutprogramming.com...
> Can someone settle an argument for me. Does a initialize on an 01 level
> move spaces to pic x fields and zeroes to pic 9 fields or does it move
> spaces to the whole 01 level?
>
| |
| Kellie Fitton 2005-09-27, 6:55 pm |
| Hi,
Yes, the initialize statement will move Zeros to all numeric variables
(pic 9),
and will move spaces to all non-numeric variables (pic X) to the whole
01 level.
you could also use it on the sub-level (05, 10, 15, etc...) with the
same results.
Kellie.
| |
| rockocubs 2005-09-27, 6:55 pm |
| Thanks Chuck,
I haven't saw a cobol manual in years. I wonder if there is a new one
online somewhere. That way i could brush up have to take a Cobol test this
w for an interview, never had to do this before.
| |
| Richard 2005-09-27, 6:55 pm |
| > one for each (named) elementary item in the record,
Except for redefininitions.
| |
| Chuck Stevens 2005-09-27, 6:55 pm |
| You can (still) download a copy of the 1985 standard for $18.00 from the
ANSI eStandards Store at www.ansi.org. The Intrinsic Function Amendment and
the Corrections Amendment are included in that price, and are also
downloadable independently at $18 per each.
You can also download the 2002 standard for the same price from the same
place.
From www.ansi.org, click on 'eStandards Store', key in "COBOL" in Search,
then GO. Document "ANSI INCITS 23-1985 (R2001)" is the 1985 standard with
its amendments, and Document "INCITS /ISO/IEC 1989-2002" is the 2002
standard.
As far as individual vendor's reference manuals for COBOL, I can't answer
for any other companies, but the COBOL85 reference manuals for the Unisys
ClearPath Plus MCP-based systems are accessible without charge from
www.unisys.com.
The way I navigated from there to, say, the COBOL85 "basic implementation"
manual was:
go to www.unisys.com
click on "mainframes" under "products"
click on "Libra Series" under ClearPath Plus MCP Servers
click on "services and support"
click on "Unisys Support Online"
click on "Product Support" in the left column
click on "documentation" in "Access documentation to learn about ..."
type "86001518-307" in the "book number" field.
At this point a list of documents show up, in two categories: the manuals
themselves, and the documentation changes (D-notes) that will eventually be
applied to those manuals. You're interested in the former, entitled "COBOL
ANSI-85 Programming Reference Manual, Volume 1: Basic Implementation", in
the list. Any one of the several that show up will do, but the last one in
the list (#7) has all the most recent D-Notes summarized at the beginning.
If you need to go back that far, COBOL74 Volume 1 (yes, we still actively
support it, though we are no longer adding feature content to it) is "book
number" 86000296-203". Pick the last one on the list.
-Chuck Stevens
"rockocubs" <rphipps@nospam.indy.rr.com> wrote in message
news:b1fab2eb9ff8664fa71b5f655e037c25@lo
calhost.talkaboutprogramming.com...
> Thanks Chuck,
> I haven't saw a cobol manual in years. I wonder if there is a new one
> online somewhere. That way i could brush up have to take a Cobol test this
> w for an interview, never had to do this before.
>
| |
| HeyBub 2005-09-27, 6:55 pm |
| rockocubs wrote:
> Thanks Chuck,
> I haven't saw a cobol manual in years. I wonder if there is a new one
> online somewhere. That way i could brush up have to take a Cobol test
> this w for an interview, never had to do this before.
See also:
http://www.netcobol.com/download/index.htm#2
| |
| Oliver Wong 2005-09-28, 6:55 pm |
|
"rockocubs" <rphipps@nospam.indy.rr.com> wrote in message
news:b1fab2eb9ff8664fa71b5f655e037c25@lo
calhost.talkaboutprogramming.com...
> Thanks Chuck,
> I haven't saw a cobol manual in years. I wonder if there is a new one
> online somewhere. That way i could brush up have to take a Cobol test this
> w for an interview, never had to do this before.
I'm using the Liant RM/COBOL Language Reference Manual as my reference,
which I got from http://www.liant.us/download/pdf/rmclrm75.pdf
| |
|
|
| Lueko Willms 2005-10-01, 7:55 am |
| .. On 27.09.05
wrote charles.stevens@unisys.com (Chuck Stevens)
on /COMP/LANG/COBOL
in dhc7lm$1omn$1@si05.rsvl.unisys.com
about Re: Initialize
CS> As far as individual vendor's reference manuals for COBOL, I can't
CS> answer for any other companies, but the COBOL85 reference manuals for
CS> the Unisys ClearPath Plus MCP-based systems are accessible without
CS> charge from www.unisys.com.
The same applies to the OS/1100 (er, 2200) version.
BTW, I always go directly to
<http://public.support.unisys.com/os...erity?type=list>
Yours,
Lüko Willms http://www.willms-edv.de
/--------- L.WILLMS@jpberlin.de -- Alle Rechte vorbehalten --
Als er am Kirchhofe vorbei ging, sagte er: Die da können nun sicher sein, daß sie nicht mehr gehängt werden, das können wir nicht. -G.C.Lichtenberg
| |
| Christopher Pomasl 2005-10-02, 6:55 pm |
| On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 11:24:00 -0700, Kellie Fitton wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Yes, the initialize statement will move Zeros to all numeric variables
> (pic 9),
> and will move spaces to all non-numeric variables (pic X) to the whole
> 01 level.
> you could also use it on the sub-level (05, 10, 15, etc...) with the
> same results.
>
> Kellie.
The INITIALIZE verb also does not act on USAGE POINTER items.
Is POINTER a standard or an IBM extension? Hmmm.
I use POINTERs extensively and need to make sure I initialize them
separately.
Chris
| |
| Rick Smith 2005-10-02, 6:55 pm |
|
"Christopher Pomasl" <pomasl-NOSpam@starband.net> wrote in message
news:pan.2005.10.02.15.31.32.276068@starband.net...
[snip]
> The INITIALIZE verb [snip]
Beginning with COBOL 85 it is 'statement' not 'verb'.
> Is POINTER a standard or an IBM extension? Hmmm.
USAGE POINTER was added to COBOL 2002;
therefore, it is standard when used with a 2002 conforming
compiler and an extension elsewhere, regardless of vendor.
| |
| William M. Klein 2005-10-03, 3:55 am |
| Although the '85 Standard did refer to the "Initialize Statement" - it was not
unitl the '02 Standard that the concept/term "verb" was removed. See (for
example)
Page III-11
"Imperative Statement. A statement that either begins with an imperative verb
and specifies an unconditional action to be taken or is a conditional statement
that is delimited by its explicit scope terminator (delimited scope statement).
An imperative statement may consist of a sequence of imperative statements."
and, Page III-24
"Statement. A syntactically valid combination of words, literals, and
separators, beginning with a verb, written in a COBOL source program."
and more directly, Page III-26
"Verb. A word that expresses an action to be taken by a COBOL compiler or object
program."
--
Bill Klein
wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com
"Rick Smith" <ricksmith@mfi.net> wrote in message
news:11k0nkhtpg8jcfa@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Christopher Pomasl" <pomasl-NOSpam@starband.net> wrote in message
> news:pan.2005.10.02.15.31.32.276068@starband.net...
> [snip]
>
> Beginning with COBOL 85 it is 'statement' not 'verb'.
>
>
> USAGE POINTER was added to COBOL 2002;
> therefore, it is standard when used with a 2002 conforming
> compiler and an extension elsewhere, regardless of vendor.
>
>
>
| |
| Rick Smith 2005-10-03, 3:55 am |
|
> "Rick Smith" <ricksmith@mfi.net> wrote in message
> news:11k0nkhtpg8jcfa@corp.supernews.com...
[snip]
"William M. Klein" <wmklein@nospam.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:It30f.73595$1M7.2040@fe12.news.easynews.com...[color=darkred]
> Although the '85 Standard did refer to the "Initialize Statement" - it was
not
> unitl the '02 Standard that the concept/term "verb" was removed. See (for
> example)
[snip]
I did not correctly recall the previous discussion in
< http://groups.google.com/group/comp...a04bbc12?hl=en&
>,
from February 2003, and regret not having taken the
time to check. My apologies.
-----begin quote
Just a side note to Chuck's accurate post below. The 2002 Standard has
eliminated the concept of a "verb" in COBOL. This was *not* a change that I
was happy with - but did please people who didn't like calling the COBOL
word "IF" a "verb". There is no replacement term introduced - all there is,
is a list of reserved words that start (procedural) statements.
----- end quote
However, while I'm here, the replacement term appears to be
"statement-name" in the text and "Statement name" from the
column heading of a table in FDIS, page 382, 14.4 Procedural
statements and sentences, Table 13.
See FDIS, page 384, 14.4.2.1 Explicit scope termination,
"...
An explicit scope terminator terminates the scope of:
1) the most-recently preceding unterminated statement having the
statement-name for which that scope terminator is defined, and
2) any unterminated statements that appear between that
statement-name and the explicit scope terminator."
And 14.4.2.2 Implicit scope termination,
"The scope of a statement that is not explicitly terminated is
implicitly terminated as follows:
1) for a single imperative statement not contained within another
statement, by
a) any element that follows the exhaustion of the statement's syntax, or
b) the next-encountered statement-name, or
c) a separator period."
|
|
|
|
|