# user-defined functions - limited scope ? **URL:** \ **Category:** Forum\ **Tags:** Adabas-Natural, Natural, Natural-on-Linux, Natural-on-Windows-Unix, Adabas-Natural-Cloud\ **Created:** [August 18, 2006, 5:22pm UTC](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/t/user-defined-functions-limited-scope/61351 "2006-08-18T17:22:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![djh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e36b37/32.png) [@djh](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/u/djh)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2006, 5:22pm UTC](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/t/user-defined-functions-limited-scope/61351/1 "2006-08-18T17:22:08Z")
Hi all, I am relatively new to NATURAL and usually work on the mainframe. Exploring the features of NAT 6.1.1 for Windows though, I detected user-defined functions. As the manual stated, you can avoid the hassle with temporary variables by using function-calls. So I tried to put the manual-example to some use and coded the following: ```auto DEFINE DATA LOCAL 01 #ARRAY (I4/0:9) INIT < 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 > 01 #TEMP (I4) END-DEFINE * INCLUDE C#ADD WRITE #ADD(< 2,3 >) /* this works * #TEMP := #ADD(< 2,3 >) WRITE #ARRAY(#TEMP) /* this works * WRITE 'array-element 2 + 3' #ARRAY(#ADD(< 2,3 >)) /* this doesn't * END ``` So in cases like that I cannot avoid the use of temporary variables? Here’s the code of the NAT-Objects - exactly as in the manual: ```auto /* Natural function definition DEFINE FUNCTION #ADD RETURNS (I4) BY VALUE DEFINE DATA PARAMETER 1 #SUMMAND1 (I4) BY VALUE 1 #SUMMAND2 (I4) BY VALUE END-DEFINE #ADD := #SUMMAND1 + #SUMMAND2 END-FUNCTION END /* Natural copycode containing prototype DEFINE PROTOTYPE #ADD RETURNS (I4) DEFINE DATA PARAMETER 1 #SUMMAND1 (I4) BY VALUE 1 #SUMMAND2 (I4) BY VALUE END-DEFINE END-PROTOTYPE ``` I’d appreciate any enlightenment on the subject. ---
**Author:** ![Matthias1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc348/32.png) [@Matthias1](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/u/Matthias1)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2006, 7:26pm UTC](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/t/user-defined-functions-limited-scope/61351/2 "2006-08-18T19:26:05Z")
> [@djh](#): > > ```auto > WRITE 'array-element 2 + 3' #ARRAY(#ADD(< 2,3 >)) /* this doesn't > ``` You’re trying to use results of a function as an array-position. This doesn’t work because such a “nesting” (like in Java or C) is not allowed in Natural. But I also wish, that this would work: ```auto define data local 01 #ARRAY (I4/0:9) INIT < 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 > 01 #a5 (A5) 01 #n5 (N5) end-define #a5 := '1' #n5 := val(#a5) write #array(#n5) /* this works write #array(val(#a5)) /* this doesn't end ``` … but it doesn’t ☹ BTW: If I want to compile or run your program, I got no syntax or runtime-error. Natural simply crashes!!! That is ugly! ---
**Author:** ![djh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e36b37/32.png) [@djh](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/u/djh)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2006, 11:38pm UTC](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/t/user-defined-functions-limited-scope/61351/3 "2006-08-18T23:38:17Z")
> [@Matthias](#): > > BTW: If I want to compile or run your program, I got no syntax or runtime-error. Natural simply crashes!!! That is ugly! Yes, that happened to me too, but only sometimes - other times I get the array-index error message. If you comment out the “bad line”, the rest works fine. Really strange, but I thought it was because on PC, for personal explorations, I am using the free Personal Edition. That crashed on me at other and quite harmless opportunities as well. My colleagues use the SPoD - we’ll try on Monday it crashes the application there as well. Too bad the “nestings” don’t work: Is it not so, that the expressions “val(a5)” or “add (\<2,3\>)” are solved first and the resulting integer is then given to the enclosing “array(solution-as-index)” ? ---
**Author:** ![Matthias1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc348/32.png) [@Matthias1](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/u/Matthias1)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2006, 3:18am UTC](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/t/user-defined-functions-limited-scope/61351/4 "2006-08-19T03:18:50Z")
> [@djh](#): > > Yes, that happened to me too, but only sometimes Anytime I check/compile/run/stow this program on my Windows Environment → crash. I’ll check in on Solaris when I’m back at office on Monday… > [@](#): > > If you comment out the “bad line”, the rest works fine. Really strange, but I thought it was because on PC, for personal explorations, I am using the free Personal Edition. I use Natural 6.1.1 PL21 with a “real” licence. > [@](#): > > That crashed on me at other and quite harmless opportunities as well. My colleagues use the SPoD - we’ll try on Monday it crashes the application there as well. BTW: [http://natural.forums.softwareag.com/viewtopic.php?t=308](http://natural.forums.softwareag.com/viewtopic.php?t=308) > [@](#): > > Too bad the “nestings” don’t work: Is it not so, that the expressions “val(a5)” or “add (\<2,3\>)” are solved first and the resulting integer is then given to the enclosing “array(solution-as-index)” ? I cannot explain it in detail, because I never used Natural-functions in real life. But you will get used to this logic. Another examle is the substring option SUBSTR. It is not a function in terms of C-style languages. Is is a part of the MOVE-Statement (and others). ---
**Author:** ![Matthias1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc348/32.png) [@Matthias1](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/u/Matthias1)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2006, 12:37pm UTC](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/t/user-defined-functions-limited-scope/61351/5 "2006-08-21T12:37:02Z")
> [@Matthias](#): > > Anytime I check/compile/run/stow this program on my Windows Environment → crash. I’ll check in on Solaris when I’m back at office on Monday… On Solaris, Natural crashes too. ```auto System Error Code 1 Registers CCR 0x0000000000000000 PC 0xffffffff7e900 ... Thread (5) <> - Core Request Current work directory: ... Segmentation Fault - core dumped ``` :shock: And I only did a check:shock: ---
**Author:** ![djh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e36b37/32.png) [@djh](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/u/djh)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2006, 2:21pm UTC](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/t/user-defined-functions-limited-scope/61351/6 "2006-08-21T14:21:59Z")
Well - looks like I won’t be using user-defined functions extensively. :? Interesting link though in your previous post. ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/techcommunity/original/3X/c/d/cd19967bb605d28a72d77eb83a1cae22f3df2eb8.svg) [@system](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2021, 2:40pm UTC](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/t/user-defined-functions-limited-scope/61351/7 "2021-04-02T14:40:47Z")