On Thu, 23 Oct 2014 16:07:41 +0200, Thomas Berg wrote: > Thanks for the example. Although the numeric sequence numbers were there > just to clarify the operation, > rather than be an indication of the assumed format of an actual case. Do you > have an example where you > can’t rely on a key/sequence field and have to depend on the actual > occurrence of the record order ?
INREC adds a (binary) sequence number in position 81-84. OUTREC checks pos. 81-84, not the sequence numbers in the example. Norbert Friemel ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
