Hi all,

We have many number of Procedures/Packages/Functions/Package bodys.In these objects some coulmns contains Hardcoded values.we need to find out the hardcoded values for that particular column.Right now we are doing manually by analyzing the code and find out the hardcoded values.

Is it possible to write any shell script for automatically find out the hardcoded values for the scrpt?

for example: emp_cd is having some hardcoded values like emp_cd in('100',','102','101',A87','D98').
we want to find out hardcoded values for some particular columns only ,not for all columns.

if it is possible to write any shell script for this please suggest me.

Thanks,
Vasu.

Hi Vasu!

That certainly sounds possible. I think we might need a little more information though. Perhaps some sample data, and which columns you want to get these values from?

Hi,

Just take exampl as EMP table.Then please give me the solution for this.

Thanks.

Your answer is too short.

  • Is the EMP table in a database? Is it a csv flat file? Some other format file? Something else entirely?
  • What do you mean by 'hard coded values'? Are these values that are in the EMP table, and "never" change? Or do you mean that you are searching for only particular values, and these search values "never" change? Or something else?
  • Do you need to look in different columns for different (sets of?) hard coded values, or are all the interesting values always in the same column?

And in any case, this forum is a place to get help, not solutions. If you want some help, please show us what you have done so far. With example data, in the actual format you have to work with. It is also helpful to say what operating system and which shell interpreter you are using.

If this is really a database question, you should post it in the appropriate database forum: Web Development | databases | your-database http://www.daniweb.com/forums/forum16.html

Edited 5 Years Ago by griswolf: Add suggestion to repost in database forum

This article has been dead for over six months. Start a new discussion instead.