| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
cobcurious
Beginner
Joined: 04 Oct 2003
Posts: 68
Topics: 25
|
 Posted: Thu Jul 08, 2004 3:22 am Post subject: Level number -77 |
 |
|
Hi,
Can any body please tell that why we have level number 77 when 01 level can serve the same purpose as level number 77 ?
Are there any specific reasons we use level no 77 ?
Thanks and Regards
Cobcurious |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kolusu
Site Admin
Joined: 26 Nov 2002
Posts: 12376
Topics: 75
Location: San Jose
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gkreth
Beginner
Joined: 28 May 2004
Posts: 29
Topics: 10
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 08, 2004 9:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Our shop discourages (disallows, even, except for some old grandfathered code) the use of 77 levels, We are supposed to use Level 01s instead. Level 77 is apparently an "older" to describe independent elementary items in the Working-Storage or Linkage Sections. I think at one time Level 01 could only be used for group items.
Also, level 77 items cannot be subdivided any further.
I think part of the "no 77" philosophy is that it's better to collect individual items into groups instead of declaring large numbers of indistinguishable 77 fields. I'm not saying I agree 100% with this - sometimes fields truly have no relationship to other fields. But it's no big deal to me either way.
At our shop we usually have a Level 01 WS-MISC-FIELDS group and put our unrelated fields there.
HTH,
--Greg
--Greg |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
slade
Intermediate
Joined: 07 Feb 2003
Posts: 266
Topics: 1
Location: Edison, NJ USA
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2004 9:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
As I recall, 01 levels, in days of yore, took a "locator" register (I think that was the term - BLLs are one type), whereas 77 levels either didn't use them at all or many 77 data items could be grouped under one register. Apparently these registers were in short supply at that time.
As technology advanced this restriction was eased or eliminated and 77 levels lost their raison d'etre. They're tolerated today for their backward compatibility.
Has anyone else heard or remember anything like this?
Regards, Jack. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cobcurious
Beginner
Joined: 04 Oct 2003
Posts: 68
Topics: 25
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2004 7:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi all,
Thanks a lot for your replies.
Regards
Cobcurious |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
neilxt
Beginner
Joined: 01 Mar 2004
Posts: 23
Topics: 1
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 19, 2006 4:09 pm Post subject: Re: Level number -77 |
|
|
| cobcurious wrote: | Hi,
Can any body please tell that why we have level number 77 when 01 level can serve the same purpose as level number 77 ?
Are there any specific reasons we use level no 77 ?
Thanks and Regards
Cobcurious |
In addition to what's been stated above, 01 levels are always located on a full word boundary. 77 levels merely take the next (however many) bytes of storage.
That few bytes hardly matters any more and you might generate inefficiencies if many binary fields are not on a word boundary.
Personally I like the visual separation of having truly independent fields marked with a 77. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Quick Manuals
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
