Portal | Manuals | References | Downloads | Info | Programs | JCLs | Master the Mainframes
IBM Mainframe Computers Forums Index
 
Register
 
IBM Mainframe Computers Forums Index Mainframe: Search IBM Mainframe Forum: FAQ Memberlist Usergroups Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in
 

 

SEARCH ALL w/ Reference Modification

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    IBMMAINFRAMES.com Support Forums -> COBOL Programming
View previous topic :: :: View next topic  
Author Message
Chris Chapel

New User


Joined: 11 Sep 2007
Posts: 10
Location: Marshfield, WI

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 10:38 pm    Post subject: SEARCH ALL w/ Reference Modification
Reply with quote

I tried to search for an existing topic (without luck I guess). I'm trying to emulate something that I did dozens of times in IBM HLASM by inserting the binary length into a OP Code for a CLC instruction, but in Enterprise COBOL.

Is this possible...using the methodology that I coded (see code block below)?

Thanks for your help.
Chris.

Code:
<data - input loaded into table below>

GOL                 2JGOLD VIOLIN                                 
NON                 2NNORM THOMPSON                               
ORC                 2ZORCHARD BRANDS                             
ORCHARD GOLD VIOLIN 2ZORCHARD GOLD VIOLIN                         
ORCHARD NORM THOMPSO2ZORCHARD NORM THOMPSON                       
ORCHARD SAHALIE     2ZORCHARD SAHALIE                             
ORCHARD SOLUTIONS   2ZORCHARD SOLUTIONS                           
RET                 2ZNORM THOMPSON RETAIL STORES                 
SAH                 2ESAHALIE                                     
SOL                 2SSOLUTIONS                                   
VITAMINCOMPASS      2KVITAMIN COMPASS (HEALTHY SOLUTIONS)         
VITAMINSUPPLY       2VVITAMIN SUPPLY (HEALTHY SOLUTIONS)         

<table definition in w/s>

01  WS-YM-DIV-TABLE.                                       
    05  YM-DIV-ENTRIES                 PIC 9(3) VALUE 0.   
    05  YM-DIV-EOF                     PIC X(3) VALUE 'NO '.
    05  YM-DIV-ENTRY          OCCURS 1 TO 100 TIMES         
                              DEPENDING ON YM-DIV-ENTRIES   
                              ASCENDING KEY TBL-YM-DIV     
                              INDEXED BY HM-DIV-INX.       
        10  TBL-YM-DIV            PIC X(20).               
        10  TBL-YM-DIV-LGTH       PIC 99.                   
        10  TBL-MZP-SUB-CODE      PIC X(2).                 
        10  TBL-MZP-SUB-NAME      PIC X(40).               

<alternate looping that provides matches>

PERFORM VARYING YM-DIV-INX FROM 1 BY 1                 
  UNTIL YM-DIV-INX > YM-DIV-ENTRIES                   
  IF TBL-YM-DIV (YM-DIV-INX) =                         
     YER-GENERIC-FLD-7                                 
     (1:TBL-YM-DIV-LGTH (YM-DIV-INX))                 
    MOVE TBL-MZP-SUB-CODE (YM-DIV-INX) TO YER-SUB-CODE
    ADD +1  TO  YM-DIV-MATCH                           
                CNT-DIV-CODE-YM-XREF                   
  ELSE                                                 
    IF YM-DIV-INX = YM-DIV-ENTRIES                     
      ADD +1  TO  YM-DIV-NOMATCH                       
    END-IF                                             
  END-IF                                               
END-PERFORM.                                           

<original intended SEARCH ALL w/ Reference Mod technique -- that isn't working>

SEARCH ALL YM-DIV-ENTRY                                 
  AT END                                               
    ADD +1  TO  YM-DIV-NOMATCH                         
  WHEN TBL-YM-DIV (YM-DIV-INX)                         
         = YER-GENERIC-FLD-7                           
           (1:TBL-YM-DIV-LGTH (YM-DIV-INX))             
    ADD +1  TO  YM-DIV-MATCH                           
                CNT-DIV-CODE-YM-XREF                   
    MOVE TBL-MZP-SUB-CODE (YM-DIV-INX) TO YER-SUB-CODE.

** <load> routine to set actual string length **

9150-LOAD-YM-DIV-XREF.                             
                                                   
    MOVE NOT-EPH-YM-DIV-CODE                       
      TO TBL-YM-DIV (YM-DIV-INX).                   
                                                   
    MOVE ZEROS TO I.                               
    INSPECT FUNCTION REVERSE(NOT-EPH-YM-DIV-CODE)   
     TALLYING I FOR LEADING SPACE.                 
    COMPUTE TBL-YM-DIV-LGTH (YM-DIV-INX) =         
       (LENGTH OF TBL-YM-DIV (YM-DIV-INX) - I).     
                                                   
    MOVE NOT-EPH-MZP-DIV-CODE                       
      TO TBL-MZP-SUB-CODE (YM-DIV-INX).             
    MOVE NOT-EPH-DIV-DESCRIPTION                   
      TO TBL-MZP-SUB-NAME (YM-DIV-INX).             
                                                   
    ADD +1  TO  YM-DIV-ENTRIES.                     
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

dick scherrer

Site Director


Joined: 23 Nov 2006
Posts: 19270
Location: Inside the Matrix

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 11:27 pm    Post subject:
Reply with quote

Hello,

When you say "isn't working" does this mean there are no matches?

You might change this:
Code:
  WHEN TBL-YM-DIV (YM-DIV-INX)                         
         = YER-GENERIC-FLD-7                           
           (1:TBL-YM-DIV-LGTH (YM-DIV-INX))       

to:
Code:
  WHEN TBL-YM-DIV (1:TBL-YM-DIV-LGTH (YM-DIV-INX))                         
         = YER-GENERIC-FLD-7                           
           (1:TBL-YM-DIV-LGTH (YM-DIV-INX))               
as an experiment.

I'm not sure if the currently coded compare will be of equal lengths.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chris Chapel

New User


Joined: 11 Sep 2007
Posts: 10
Location: Marshfield, WI

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 11:33 pm    Post subject:
Reply with quote

I had started with a variation of your suggestion, have the reference modifcation on the array-side and the compiler didn't like this. I thought that I still had the compiler error, but I don't. I will however give this method a try.

Thanks Dick.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bill O'Boyle

CICS Moderator


Joined: 14 Jan 2008
Posts: 2502
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 11:51 pm    Post subject: Reply to: SEARCH ALL w/ Reference Modification
Reply with quote

IMHO, the ODO (in WS) can be changed to just a plain old OCCURS 100. Also, based upon the number of entries that you're loading, you'd be much better off with either a SEARCH or an in-line PERFORM. Generally, when a table exceeds 128 entries, then a SEARCH ALL is the more efficient method for table searching, providing (of course) all the table entries are sorted.

If you intend on keeping the SEARCH ALL, before you populate the table, you need to initialize it with ALL HIGH-VALUES and then load the valid table entries. What's the value of YM-DIV-ENTRIES?

But, I'm unsure why your reference modification compare doesn't work. However, COBOL (in its infinite wisdom) will NOT expand into a CLC, but rather a CLCL. This is due to the fact that the reference modification length is OTHER THAN a LENGTH OF. I know it seems silly that COBOL would not have the smarts to use a CLC, but that's the way it is. Inasmuch as you'd like to insert the length for operand-1 into a generated CLC, you can't do that in COBOL.

FWIW, the same thing happens on a MOVE with a reference modification length which is unknown (other than a LENGTH OF), COBOL will issue an MVCL, even for ONE byte! I know, it's crazy, but that's the way it is.

I had a discussion with a COBOL compiler guy at SHARE 2008 and I asked him that very question; why the CLCL, MVCL etc? He said is was because the compiler doesn't know the length until execution time and I said "Well, PL/I does", but he never gave me a good answer and dodged me. PL/I will actually generate an EX over an MVC or CLC, using the supplied length minus 1. To make it more interesting, the PL/I complier folks are on the same floor and in the same vicinity as the COBOL compiler folks. But, I guess they don't talk to one another.

But, fellow member "Enrico" said it best "Because PL/I is a smarter compiler". However, if I had uttered this to the COBOL guy, I would have gotten a coffee shampoo! icon_wink.gif

Later....

Bill
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
UmeySan

Active Member


Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 743
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Mon Feb 15, 2010 3:56 pm    Post subject:
Reply with quote

That's why i always prefer to code in Assembler.

If they let me do this. :-)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chris Chapel

New User


Joined: 11 Sep 2007
Posts: 10
Location: Marshfield, WI

PostPosted: Mon Feb 15, 2010 8:00 pm    Post subject:
Reply with quote

Bill, thanks for your advise on the suggested threshold to apply the binary versus serial search. I've heard many suggestions in the past 15-20 years (most of them significantly smaller than 128 entries), but have never performance tested the theory.

Regarding the initialize with ALL HIGH-VALUES, that would be required on a search with a "static" number of entries, but w/ the ODO clause, the scope of the search is limited to the value presented to the ODO clause (which in this case is: 12 - the number of records from the input-loading table which is stored in YM-DIV-ENTRIES).

As I mentioned following Dick's reply, I tried the reference modification on the array-side of the WHEN... clause and received the following compiler error.

Code:
001621         136600     SEARCH ALL YM-DIV-ENTRY                                         C
001622         136700       AT END                                                        C
001623      1  136800         ADD +1  TO  YM-DIV-NOMATCH                                  C
001624         136900       WHEN TBL-YM-DIV (YM-DIV-INX)                                  C
001625         136910                (1:TBL-YM-DIV-LGTH (YM-DIV-INX))                     C
                                                                                           
001625==> IGYPS2213-S "TBL-YM-DIV" was reference modified and reference modification is not
                      allowed in this context.  The statement was discarded.               
                                                                                           
001626         137000              = YER-GENERIC-FLD-7                                    C
001627      1  137200         ADD +1  TO  YM-DIV-MATCH                                    C
001628      1  137300                     CNT-DIV-CODE-YM-XREF                            C
001629      1  137400         MOVE TBL-MZP-SUB-CODE (YM-DIV-INX) TO YER-SUB-CODE.         C
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dick scherrer

Site Director


Joined: 23 Nov 2006
Posts: 19270
Location: Inside the Matrix

PostPosted: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:14 am    Post subject:
Reply with quote

Hello,

I was afraid of that. . . Bummer.

Did you try this without the ODO? Again just an experiment.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
View previous topic :: :: View next topic  
Post new topic   Reply to topic    IBMMAINFRAMES.com Support Forums -> COBOL Programming All times are GMT + 6 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 

Search our Forum:

Similar Topics
Topic Author Forum Replies Posted
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Sort card to replace text using cross... Susanta SYNCSORT 32 Tue Sep 13, 2016 4:17 pm
No new posts Search a Load Module sreekanth1984 TSO/ISPF 8 Tue Jun 07, 2016 8:45 pm
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. MEMOAPIX - Searching for a Reference ... Steve Coalbran All Other Mainframe Topics 13 Wed Feb 03, 2016 12:01 pm
No new posts Copy one PDS to another PDS based on ... alluri12 JCL & VSAM 10 Tue Sep 29, 2015 8:10 pm
No new posts Search and replace the key in the report V S Amarendra Reddy SYNCSORT 1 Thu Jul 09, 2015 7:41 pm


Facebook
Back to Top
 
Mainframe Wiki | Forum Rules | Bookmarks | Subscriptions | FAQ | Tutorials | Contact Us