COBOL NUMVAL issues
in [Cobol]
|
Prev: All X'0D' lost during reading line sequential file using microfocus se
Next: All X'0D' lost during reading line sequential file using microfocus se
From: santlou on 24 Jul 2008 14:45 I'm using NUMVAL to convert an Alphanumeric field to numeric data, but NUMVAL is not working the way it is documented. Here is what I have: 05 WS-NUM-A PIC 9(10) VALUE ZERO. ... COMPUTE WS-NUM-A = FUNCTION NUMVAL ("12345678") After this stmt, WS-NUM-A = 0012345678 ... COMPUTE WS-NUM-A = FUNCTION NUMVAL ("123456789") After this stmt, WS-NUM-A = 6784000075 According to the documentation, NUMVAL is accurate up to 18 digits. Why is it that when I process a 9-digit field, the result is Totally different and doesnt make any sense? Any assistance that you can provide will be appreciated. Using z/os. -- Message posted using http://www.talkaboutprogramming.com/group/comp.lang.cobol/ More information at http://www.talkaboutprogramming.com/faq.html
From: Howard Brazee on 24 Jul 2008 16:07 On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 13:45:51 -0500, "santlou" <santlou(a)comcast.net> wrote: >I'm using NUMVAL to convert an Alphanumeric field to numeric data, but >NUMVAL is not working the way it is documented. > >Here is what I have: > >05 WS-NUM-A PIC 9(10) VALUE ZERO. > >.. > >COMPUTE WS-NUM-A = FUNCTION NUMVAL ("12345678") > >After this stmt, WS-NUM-A = 0012345678 >.. > >COMPUTE WS-NUM-A = FUNCTION NUMVAL ("123456789") > >After this stmt, WS-NUM-A = 6784000075 > >According to the documentation, NUMVAL is accurate up to 18 digits. > >Why is it that when I process a 9-digit field, the result is Totally >different and doesnt make any sense? > >Any assistance that you can provide will be appreciated. > >Using z/os. Here's what I get: WS-NUM-A="0012345678" WS-NUM-A="0123456789" PP 5655-G53 IBM Enterprise COBOL for z/OS 3.4.1 Date 07/24/2008 Time 14:06:04 Page 1 Invocation parameters: TEST,XREF,MAP,OUTDD(SYSOUX),DYNAM,SSRANGE,RENT,BUFSIZE(20000) Options in effect: NOADATA NOADV APOST ARITH(COMPAT) NOAWO BUFSIZE(20000) NOCICS CODEPAGE(1140) NOCOMPILE(E) NOCURRENCY DATA(31) NODATEPROC DBCS NODECK NODIAGTRUNC NODLL NODUMP DYNAM NOEXIT NOEXPORTALL NOFASTSRT FLAG(I,I) NOFLAGSTD INTDATE(ANSI) LANGUAGE(EN) LIB LINECOUNT(60) NOLIST MAP NOMDECK NONAME NSYMBOL(NATIONAL) NONUMBER NUMPROC(NOPFD) OBJECT NOOFFSET NOOPTIMIZE OUTDD(SYSOUX) PGMNAME(COMPAT) RENT RMODE(AUTO) SEQUENCE SIZE(MAX) SOURCE SPACE(1) NOSQL SQLCCSID SSRANGE NOTERM TEST(ALL,SYM,NOSEPARATE) NOTHREAD TRUNC(STD) NOVBREF PP 5655-G53 IBM Enterprise COBOL for z/OS 3.4.1 NOWORD XREF(FULL) YEARWINDOW(1900) ZWB
From: Howard Brazee on 24 Jul 2008 16:12 EDIT UMS.D44201.COBOL(BRAZEE) - 01.29 7 CHARS 'WS-NUM-A' Command ===> Scroll ===> CSR ****** ****************************** Top of Data ******************************* - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 43 Line(s) not Displayed 003640 05 WS-NUM-A PIC 9(10) VALUE ZERO. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 30 Line(s) not Displayed 006150 COMPUTE WS-NUM-A = FUNCTION NUMVAL ("12345678"). 006151 DISPLAY 'WS-NUM-A="' WS-NUM-A '"'. 006160 COMPUTE WS-NUM-A = FUNCTION NUMVAL ("123456789") 006170 DISPLAY 'WS-NUM-A="' WS-NUM-A '"'. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 12 Line(s) not Displayed
From: HeyBub on 24 Jul 2008 16:27 santlou wrote: > I'm using NUMVAL to convert an Alphanumeric field to numeric data, but > NUMVAL is not working the way it is documented. > > Here is what I have: > > 05 WS-NUM-A PIC 9(10) VALUE ZERO. > > .. > > COMPUTE WS-NUM-A = FUNCTION NUMVAL ("12345678") > > After this stmt, WS-NUM-A = 0012345678 > .. > > COMPUTE WS-NUM-A = FUNCTION NUMVAL ("123456789") > > After this stmt, WS-NUM-A = 6784000075 > > According to the documentation, NUMVAL is accurate up to 18 digits. > > Why is it that when I process a 9-digit field, the result is Totally > different and doesnt make any sense? > > Any assistance that you can provide will be appreciated. > Can't duplicate your results - I get the expected answers.
From: William M. Klein on 24 Jul 2008 16:47
The results are certainly "unexpected". What compiler (vendor and version/release) are you using on what platform? It is with noting that NUMVAL is NOT required to produce "exact" results, i.e. it MAY (in a Standard conforming implementation) return a floating-point value which MAY be different than what is expected. However, I would consider what you report to be a "bug". Have you contacted your vendor? -- Bill Klein wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com "santlou" <santlou(a)comcast.net> wrote in message news:614c9cdabd83e6e6e9658d88e4c85eea(a)localhost.talkaboutprogramming.com... > I'm using NUMVAL to convert an Alphanumeric field to numeric data, but > NUMVAL is not working the way it is documented. > > Here is what I have: > > 05 WS-NUM-A PIC 9(10) VALUE ZERO. > > .. > > COMPUTE WS-NUM-A = FUNCTION NUMVAL ("12345678") > > After this stmt, WS-NUM-A = 0012345678 > .. > > COMPUTE WS-NUM-A = FUNCTION NUMVAL ("123456789") > > After this stmt, WS-NUM-A = 6784000075 > > According to the documentation, NUMVAL is accurate up to 18 digits. > > Why is it that when I process a 9-digit field, the result is Totally > different and doesnt make any sense? > > Any assistance that you can provide will be appreciated. > > Using z/os. > > -- > Message posted using > http://www.talkaboutprogramming.com/group/comp.lang.cobol/ > More information at http://www.talkaboutprogramming.com/faq.html > |