IBM Power Ideas Portal
This portal is to open public enhancement requests against IBM Power Systems products, including IBM i. To view all of your ideas submitted to IBM, create and manage groups of Ideas, or create an idea explicitly set to be either visible by all (public) or visible only to you and IBM (private), use the IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com).
Shape the future of IBM!
We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:
Search existing ideas
Start by searching and reviewing ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted, and add a comment, vote, or subscribe to updates on them if they matter to you. If you can't find what you are looking for,
Post your ideas
Post an idea.
Get feedback from the IBM team and other customers to refine your idea.
Follow the idea through the IBM Ideas process.
Specific links you will want to bookmark for future use
Welcome to the IBM Ideas Portal (https://www.ibm.com/ideas) - Use this site to find out additional information and details about the IBM Ideas process and statuses.
IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com) - Use this site to view all of your ideas, create new ideas for any IBM product, or search for ideas across all of IBM.
ideasibm@us.ibm.com - Use this email to suggest enhancements to the Ideas process or request help from IBM for submitting your Ideas.
IBM believes that the request described has been solved and is available with PTFs for 7.3 and 7.4.
For details, please see https://ibm.biz/rpgcafe_likeds_qual_name
IBM agrees with the request and a solution appears to be desirable and feasible. IBM intends to provide a solution. However, IBM's plans may change and no commitment is made that a solution will be provided.
The CAAC has reviewed this requirement and recommends that IBM view this as a “nice to have” low priority feature.
This enhancement would be nice to have -- there is a clunky workaround -- but it may not be needed very often.
Background: The COMMON Americas Advisory Council (CAAC) members have a broad range of experience in working with small and medium-sized IBM i customers. CAAC has a key role in working with IBM i development to help assess the value and impact of individual RFEs on the broader IBM i community, and has therefore reviewed your RFE.
For more information about CAAC, see www.common.org/caac
For more details about CAAC's role with RFEs, see http://www.ibmsystemsmag.com/Blogs/i-Can/May-2017/COMMON-Americas-Advisory-Council-%28CAAC%29-and-RFEs/
Nancy Uthke-Schmucki - CAAC Program Manager
IBM will use this request as input to planning but no commitment is made or implied. This request will be updated in the future if IBM implements it. IBM will use votes and comments from others in the community to help prioritize this request.
Note that the compiler does allow a qualified name for the LIKE keyword. The issue only applies to the LIKEDS keyword.
Due to processing by IBM, this request was reassigned to have the following updated attributes:
Brand - Servers and Systems Software
Product family - Power Systems
Product - IBM i
Component - Languages - RPG
Operating system - IBM i
Source - None
For recording keeping, the previous attributes were:
Brand - Servers and Systems Software
Product family - Power Systems
Product - IBM i
Component - Application Development
Operating system - IBM i
Source - None
I have to disagree with pnicolay. While you could do it that way you lose the primary advantage of directly nesting DSs which is that the complete structure is _visible_ in your code.
In case you need to re-use DS's you normally define them standalone and not inline.
So define Address as t_Address and than you can use it both in your t_User as your procedure return value.
To me this kind of code is more cleaner than what you're trying to do (not that it wouldn't be handy).
Finally someone came out with good idea!