Fix db2

[samdion1994]

Fix the expands db2 copybooks.

[Rune-Christensen]

@samdion1994
Would you please elaborate on why you need to remove this test ?
If it is no longer passing, then the test should be fixed, instead of removed.

[Rune-Christensen]

I can see why the correct location for these lines is not in the writeToSource function.
I am right in assuming that the new location, in the processingBeforeEcho... function, will place the lines just before the procedure division?
What would happen, if there is a linkage section, located before the procedure division?
I would like a test, that verifies the functionality of adding the fileSectionStatements.

[samdion1994]

You were right, I had to add stuff to handle le linkage section. I wanted to know what you want to do with the stuff in the linkage? If there isn't integrated testing and no subcall we could just comment it?

[Rune-Christensen]

Hi @samdion1994

Thank you for the tests, it helped tremendously in understanding what is happening.

With that understanding now in place, I cannot approve the pull request, because the expansion of the copybook is no longer happening "in place".
Meaning, we cannot move the working storage elements, to other locations in working storage.
Consider this example:

EXEC SQL INCLUDE TEXEM  END-EXEC.
01  TEXEM2 REDEFINES TEXEM.
   10 FULL-NAME PIC X(20).
   10 FILLER PIC X(26).

The current changes would move TEXEM below the redefine, meaning the compile would fail.

Looking at the code again, I think the insertion of code is in the correct location, the issue is, that .getFileSectionStatements() is a bad name. Either the function is misused in this context, and there ought to be another function managing the expansion of copybooks, or the function should have another name, making it useable in more contexts.

Cheers,
Rune

[Rune-Christensen]

Hi @samdion1994
Thank you, the new function is a much better encapsulation of what is happening in the code.

But, the changes still moves the expanded copybook to a new location, that will have to be fixed before approval.
Thank you

Cheers

[Rune-Christensen]

Hi @samdion1994
Any progress on reverting the changes, that causes the expansion of SQLCA/TEXEM to move from where it was?

Regards
Rune

[samdion1994]

Hi rune, Sorry been busy!

Probably this week :)

[samdion1994]

Hey @Rune-Christensen,

Think you can merge this and I could do another fix later?

There a lot of stuff I need to change for this request and little time, but I get what you're saying and I agree that this needs to be fixed. Also I think we might have the same problem with the file section expander.