Re: [open-cobol-list] displaying max values in comp-5 field

[Bill Klein]

Vince,
  Do you know of any compilers that do truncation with COMP-5?  I know LOTS
that do with COMP or BINARY.  But almost all compilers that I know of that
have COMP-5 as an extension, have it explicitly so it will NOT truncate
based on picture clause (i.e. base 10).  Most, but not all, also have COMP-5
in "operations system - best - binary" format, i.e. little-endian /
big-endian automatically done based not he O/S on which the compiler is run.

Again,
  If the compiler allows for

01  aGroup.
 05  Num1  Pic S9(4) Com-5.
          ...
Move High-Values to aGroup
Display Num1

then it SHOULD (IMHO) display the full value of the data item.  If the
display doesn't work that way, then the compiler should reject it.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: vince coen [mailto:address@hidden 
> Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 6:24 AM
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: [open-cobol-list] displaying max values in comp-5 field
> 
> Hi
> On Monday 27 July 2009, Sergey Kashyrin wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I think it's not about that
> > It's about DISPLAY which actually not suppose to display 
> ANY binary or
> > comp-3/4/5 fields. I don't see any contradictions with formal Cobol.
> 
> Oops, I 'assumed' that you had moved it to a numeric display 
> field prior to 
> display, but my argument is still valid against various 
> compilers in that 
> auto truncation can occur and manipulating a s9(4) field 
> after over flow any 
> thing can and no doubt will, happen so it is still verifyable 
> to fix by 
> change to s9(5) as needed.
> 
> There again I have programmed in the basis of a specific 
> compilers behaviour 
> as against what the language specs say. It is only over the 
> last few years 
> that I have changed my programming style to match the 
> language specs knowing 
> that the compiler will no doubt change during the life of the 
> app which will 
> be longer than I have anticipated as proven with code written 
> in the 60's and 
> 70's now being converted from MF workbench to run under Open Cobol.
> 
> Vince
> 
> >
> > Not going to do any fixes on that, correct me if I wrong
> >
> > Regards
> > SKA
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "vince coen" <address@hidden>
> > To: <address@hidden>
> > Sent: Sunday, July 26, 2009 7:05 AM
> > Subject: [open-cobol-list] displaying max values in comp-5 field
> >
> > > Hi;
> > >
> > > On Saturday 25 July 2009, Robert Keane wrote:
> > >> Hello All,
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I've found a problem when displaying the maximum value 
> in a comp-5
> > >> field. If an s9(4) comp-5 can hold +32767 or -32768. 
> After initializing
> > >> or moving +32767 or -32768 to the s9(4) comp-5 field the 
> display gives
> > >> +2767 or -2768, the high order digit is dropped. However 
> if the comp-5
> > >> field is moved to a field defined with enough z's the 
> display is ok.
> > >
> > > A dropped leading digit does not supprise me.  Moving 
> above 9,999 to a
> > > pic s9 (4) will result in truncation. Solution is to 
> increase picture
> > > size to reflect the maximum value your field will get to 
> in this case pic
> > > s9(5) comp-5.
> > >
> > > Or better still use binary-short, its more effective for 
> arithmetic etc
> > > in OC.
> > >
> > > Vince
> > >
> >
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------
> _______________________________________________
> open-cobol-list mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open-cobol-list
>