LOB variables and file reference variables arrays

[ilidio-lopes]

How Has This Been Tested?

Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Provide instructions so we can reproduce. Please also list any relevant details for your test configuration

• Check the test cases in the PR . Host variables can be in a sample code

        Identification Division.
        Program-Id. 'TEST1'.
        Data Division.
        Working-Storage Section.
       01 VAR1. 
           04 VAR2 USAGE IS SQL TYPE IS CHARACTER LARGE OBJECT (10 M) OCCURS 10 TIMES.
        PROCEDURE division.
           display  VAR1.

• Test A
• Test B

Checklist:

• Each of my commits contains one meaningful change
• I have performed rebase of my branch on top of the development
• I have performed a self-review of my own code
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
• My changes generate no new warnings
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
• I have checked my code and corrected any misspellings

[ap891843]

I am wondering if we need to add the newly added lexemes to the coloring and auto completion.

[ap891843]

I like above approach of dbs_host_var_levels_arrays, where it a single rule for validation. Obviously there is nothing wrong in this as well.

[ap891843]

don't see use case tests for these

[slavek-kucera]

This would also apply to the BLOB variant, not just the BINARY LARGE OBJECT, right?

[slavek-kucera]

One more question to this - what is the origin of the restriction to binary lobs only?
I see this in the DB2 preprocessor output:

 04  VAR4                             OCCURS 30.           
   49 VAR4-LENGTH                    PIC S9(9) COMP-5.     
   49 VAR4-DATA                      PIC X(20).            
*   04 VAR4 USAGE IS SQL TYPE IS BLOB (20) OCCURS 30 TIMES.
 04  VAR5                             OCCURS 30.           
   49 VAR5-LENGTH                    PIC S9(9) COMP-5.     
   49 VAR5-DATA                      PIC X(20).            
*   04 VAR5 USAGE IS SQL TYPE IS CLOB (20) OCCURS 30 TIMES.
 04  VAR6                             OCCURS 40.           
   49 VAR6-LENGTH                    PIC S9(9) COMP-5.     
   49 VAR6-DATA                      PIC G(30720) DISPLAY-1
*   04 VAR6 USAGE IS SQL TYPE IS DBCLOB (30 K) OCCURS 40.  

[ilidio-lopes]

One more question to this - what is the origin of the restriction to binary lobs only? I see this in the DB2 preprocessor output:

 04  VAR4                             OCCURS 30.           
   49 VAR4-LENGTH                    PIC S9(9) COMP-5.     
   49 VAR4-DATA                      PIC X(20).            
*   04 VAR4 USAGE IS SQL TYPE IS BLOB (20) OCCURS 30 TIMES.
 04  VAR5                             OCCURS 30.           
   49 VAR5-LENGTH                    PIC S9(9) COMP-5.     
   49 VAR5-DATA                      PIC X(20).            
*   04 VAR5 USAGE IS SQL TYPE IS CLOB (20) OCCURS 30 TIMES.
 04  VAR6                             OCCURS 40.           
   49 VAR6-LENGTH                    PIC S9(9) COMP-5.     
   49 VAR6-DATA                      PIC G(30720) DISPLAY-1
*   04 VAR6 USAGE IS SQL TYPE IS DBCLOB (30 K) OCCURS 40.  

Someone checked that on the mainframe. Probably only binary lobs was checked at that time.
I will make changes for CLOB and DBLOB

[slavek-kucera]

One last details - DBCLOB generates PIC G(...), not PIC X(...).

[ap891843]

I am wondering if we need to add the newly added lexemes to the coloring and auto completion.

same have been added under PR #2394

[slavek-kucera]

One last details - DBCLOB generates PIC G(...), not PIC X(...).