|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
amdparsn
New User
Joined: 09 Feb 2009
Posts: 8
Location: Chennai
|
|
|
|
Whether alphanumeric field can be compared with a another alphanumeric field?
Example:
EX-DATE(alphanumeric) > EX-DATE1(alphanumeric) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bill O'Boyle
CICS Moderator
Joined: 14 Jan 2008
Posts: 2501
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
|
|
|
|
In your example, we're assuming both fields are the same length and this length is greater than one?
If true, then you can only easily compare both fields for EQUAL or NOT EQUAL.
If the length is one, then you can also compare for LESS THAN or GREATER THAN.
If the length is greater than one, then you would have to compare each byte of each field, one-on-one/left-to-right, if you were attempting a LESS THAN or GREATER THAN condition or try a more "creative" approach (yours to decide), if the fields lengths were different.
You need to put your EBCDIC hat on, because (for example) NUMERIC values 0-9 are greater than CAPITAL letters A-Z, whereas, in ASCII, it's just the opposite.
Your field-names indicate that these could be date-values, perhaps of the same format, such as "CCYYMMDD"?
If they only contain NUMERIC values and they're the same length and same format, then a LESS THAN or GREATER THAN comparison could be used as well.
Things to ponder.... 
Bill |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
amdparsn
New User
Joined: 09 Feb 2009
Posts: 8
Location: Chennai
|
|
|
|
Well Yess they are date fields with this format DD/MM/CCYY. can i move this alphanumeric field to a group like this below
01 A.
05 B PIC 9(02).
05 FILLER PIC X(01)
05 C PIC 9(02).
05 FILLER PIC X(01).
05 D PIC 9(04).
01 E pic 9(08).
MOVE EX-DATE TO A.???????
After this move,
MOVE B TO E(1:2)
MOVE C TO E(3:2)
MOVE D TO E(5:8)
WHETHER THIS WILL WORK???? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dbzTHEdinosauer
Global Moderator
Joined: 20 Oct 2006
Posts: 6966
Location: porcelain throne
|
|
|
|
yes, it would seem logical to move a DD/MM/CCYY fomated date field
to a CCYYMMDD formated field,
if one expected a rational outcome.
your question is not predicated on alphanumeric comparing
but assuming that somehow the cobol compiler will re-arrange your date field.
Sorry, cobol does not do that.
whether it be alphanumeric or numeric compare,
you have to organize your field structure in a way to reflect logical order. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Sample
Global Moderator
Joined: 06 Jun 2008
Posts: 8700
Location: Dubuque, Iowa, USA
|
|
|
|
You really, really, really need to spend some time in the COBOL Language Reference and Programming Guide manuals -- you can find them by clicking the manuals link at the top of this page.
COBOL always allows you to move an alphanumeric variable to a group (which is also alphanumeric). Reference modification can be used on USAGE DISPLAY variables without any issues, as well. So semantically, the answer to your question is yes you can do it.
However, the code you posted has three syntax errors -- you need a period after the first filler in A, reference modification references need spaces in them, and E is not 13 characters long so moving 8 bytes starting in position 5 will generate a compile error. So the code you posted will not compile from a syntax standpoint, even though it could work if you fixed the syntax errors. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bill O'Boyle
CICS Moderator
Joined: 14 Jan 2008
Posts: 2501
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
|
|
|
|
Actually -
Specifies an incorrect length, which Robert has noted.
Either replace 8 with 4 or change the MOVE to -
And the compiler will automatically calculate the length for you.
But, you need to devote more time reading the manuals and familiarizing yourself with the language.
Bill |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dbzTHEdinosauer
Global Moderator
Joined: 20 Oct 2006
Posts: 6966
Location: porcelain throne
|
|
|
|
i just spent a few moments looking,
and no computer language (that I know of)
will allow you to compare two fields
built on the dd/mm/ccyy format
and provide proper results,
without the aid of functions to re-arrange the order. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phrzby Phil
Senior Member
Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 1049
Location: Richmond, Virginia
|
|
|
|
SAS has informats (i.e., input formats) for various date formats, including ddmmyy10.:
Test:
| Code: |
data;
input @1 d1 ddmmyy10.
@12 d2 ddmmyy10.
;
format d1 d2 date9.; /* print as date rather than internal value */
put d1= d2= ; /* print dates */
if d1 < d2
then put 'd1 less than d2';
else put 'd1 not less than d2';
/* inline data */
datalines;
20/01/2010 21/01/2009
;
run;
|
Results:
| Code: |
d1=20JAN2010 d2=21JAN2009
d1 not less than d2
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dbzTHEdinosauer
Global Moderator
Joined: 20 Oct 2006
Posts: 6966
Location: porcelain throne
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
| SAS has informats (i.e., input formats) for various date formats, including ddmmyy10 |
which are internal functions to manipulate the data during comparison. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Sample
Global Moderator
Joined: 06 Jun 2008
Posts: 8700
Location: Dubuque, Iowa, USA
|
|
|
|
| Actually, if you use informat DDMMYY10. then SAS converts the date into the number of days since January 1, 1960 and the comparison is just two numeric values being compared to each other. SAS does all the hard work in the informat conversion during the input processing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
santohsks1987
Warnings : 1
New User
.jpg)
Joined: 29 Dec 2010
Posts: 31
Location: Mumbai
|
|
|
|
Hi all,
I have 2 dates in the same format yyyymmdd.
can i compare them using the greater than or less than operator as this does not have any symbols inbetween them?
i.e., ws-date1 < ws-date2 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phrzby Phil
Senior Member
Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 1049
Location: Richmond, Virginia
|
|
|
|
1. And you tried this, right, or do we do your (very simple) work for you? If you cannot test this, how can you test more complicated processes?
2. Also, while you're at it, try with separators (e.g., / or -). Did that work, too? Why would you think that would affect a character comparison when the separators would be in the same positions? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gylbharat
Active Member
.jpg)
Joined: 31 Jul 2009
Posts: 565
Location: Bangalore
|
|
|
|
| santohsks1987 wrote: |
Hi all,
I have 2 dates in the same format yyyymmdd.
can i compare them using the greater than or less than operator as this does not have any symbols inbetween them?
i.e., ws-date1 < ws-date2 |
Yes, if both are valid dates and both the dates are in same format then they can be compared using greater than or less than operators |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bill Woodger
Moderator Emeritus
Joined: 09 Mar 2011
Posts: 7309
Location: Inside the Matrix
|
|
|
|
No requirement for the dates to be "valid".
Obviously, the the test to make any sense in the specific context, it would be good to have actual dates in them. As Phil has said, seperators, of any time or size, do not matter as long as they are in the same position in both fields.
But, many-a-time, I have move HIGH-VALUES to such a date field when doing file comparisons. This is by no means a "valid" date, but it is a logical and normal way to do things when there is no more input for one or other of the files.
As far as the "validity" of the date data is concerned, I guess the TS already covered that in his description. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ronald Burr
Active User
Joined: 22 Oct 2009
Posts: 293
Location: U.S.A.
|
|
|
|
| gylbharat wrote: |
| Yes, if both are valid dates and both the dates are in same format then they can be compared using greater than or less than operators |
A true, but VERY misleading statement.
While two "valid" dates in the "same format" CAN be compared using greater than or less than operators, the results of such a comparison will not be VALID unless the dates are in a format that is in, or encodes a date that is in century,year,month,day order (note: this includes both display formats (e.g. YYYY/MM/DD), and internal formats derived from same (e.g. COBOL's INTEGER-OF-DATE function). Consider the following comparisons that would give invalid results, even though the dates and date formats are "valid" and in the "same format":
dates in the format month,day,year (with or without the century)(U.S. format),
e.g. comparing 05/27/2011 to 06/27/2010
dates in the format day,month,year (with or without the century) (non-U.S. format),
e.g. comparing 27/05/2011 to 23/06/2011
dates in the format month-name, day, year,
e.g. comparing May 27, 2011 to Aug 15, 2011
dates in the format day, month-name, year,
e.g. comparing 27 May, 2011 to 28 Apr, 2011
dates in the format year,day,month (without the century)
e.g. comparing 11/27/05 to 11/28/03
dates in the format year,month,day (without the century),
e.g. comparing 11/05/27 to 99/05/27
note: the format YYMMDD CAN be valid if the comparison is being done in COBOL and the dates are defined as windowed (DATE-FORMAT YYXXXX)
dates in the julian format YYDDD,
e.g. comparing 11143 to 99143
note: the format YYMMDD CAN be valid if the comparison is being done in COBOL and the dates are defined as windowed (DATE-FORMAT YYXXXX) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
