> Whatever happened to OS/360's vaunted device > independence? ... > > Gone with the wind. All too many programs check for device type
I hear you and I agree, but it's really two different issues: - Some developer decides to "over-check" device types. Stupid, but it just affects that one program and its users. - This issue affects every developer who wants to write a program that exploits 31-bit storage (what a concept in 2005!) and still supports terminal I/O. Charles -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005 5:14 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Device Independence (was: ... DCB coexistence ...) In a recent note, Charles Mills said: > Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2005 16:41:40 -0700 > > <rant> > What a piece of #&%#&! Whatever happened to OS/360's vaunted device > independence? ... <\rant> > Gone with the wind. All too many programs check for device type, F1 DSCB, etc and fail if it's something they're not designed for. The fallback position should be simply OPEN; GET/PUT; ... CLOSE; and let the chips fall where they may, not decline to process the data set. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
