On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Michael Harding<mhard...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> While all-pipes solutions are usually elegant and always inherently cool, > either Bob's or the Piper's could be a challenge to build dynamically. I'd > probably use one or the other - or something similar - for a fixed case, > but I think Shimon's search for a generalized solution would be more easily > addressed by a Rexx stage and wouldn't suffer that much of a performance > penalty. There is a strong analogy with "zone" that allows for a selection stage to operate on portion of the record. Some time ago I wrote a "son of zone" stage that has the 3way topology of John under the covers (with addpipe, in case you want to make it yourself). You use it like this: sozone 22-31 reverse | sozone 48-56 reverse Obviously the "reverse" could also be replaced by a REXX stage (as long as it nicely outputs one record for each input record). Even when you want to use REXX to perform the operation on the record, it does not mean you also would have to use REXX to split the record in parts and glue them together again. The "Pipe Think" is that you probably already had code to deal with the full record, and such a simple piece of infrastructure suddenly makes all the existing programs work with portions of a record, without the need to change all of them to add the parameters to select part of the record. Sir Rob the Plumber
