On Jun 22, 2005, at 11:09 PM, Thomas Conley wrote:
----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Zitzelberger"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 7:58 PM
Subject: Re: Another OS/390 to z/OS 1.4 migration question (COBOL)
On Jun 22, 2005, at 7:04 PM, Steve Comstock wrote:
IGYPS0157-E A shift-out was found in column 50 without a
matching shift-in in a nonnumeric or national literal. The
literal was processed as written.
A shift-out without a shift-in? Pretty obvious.
Not if he was not using DBCS. No reason to expect
this message. Apparently it was caused by the
change if default compiler option settings, which
does seem a little obscure, don't you think?
Not at all.
Just because you find a shift-in in your source doesn't mean the
error message is at fault. If you look at your listing and actually
see a shift in there, then you might want to complain about the
preprocessor that placed it there. But that would be the
preprocessors fault, not the message -- it means exactly what it
says.
If you will pardon the pun, this sound like a perfect example of
'shooting the messenger' instead of addressing the root cause.
Joe,
You are wrong here. Imagine a shop that has used COBOL for decades,
and can't even spell DBCS. All of a sudden this message pops up after
a compiler upgrade. The programmer asks "What's a shift-in?" The
systems programmer says "BTF outta me. Let's get the message manual."
Oops, no manual, now what? Open a PMR only to be told by COBOL Level
2 what an idiot you are......
Your assumption that this message tells the whole story is absurd.
Every IBM message is supposed to have a response documented, like
this:
Programmer response: If using DBCS support, be sure that your DBCS
character stream contains proper shift-in shift-out pairs. If you are
not using DBCS, be sure that you specify the NODBCS in your compile.
Problem solved. Expecting the user to know every option and feature
of the COBOL compiler, especially those features and options that
they're not even using, is ridiculous. That's why every error message
generated by an IBM product is supposed to be fully documented with
appropriate Response sections.
Regards,
Tom Conley
Tom,
Suggest you create a SHARE requirement and submit it. Even then IBM
COBOL won't do it. They have their heals dug so tightly in the mud on
this one. OR even better somebody should write a MSG & Codes and sell
it that would show IBM that it is needed.
Ed
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
