The german mainframe Telefunken TR 440 had a command language in 1970
already,
which was the same for batch and dialog. No need to learn different
languages like
JCL and TSO command languages, and you could do all the things you can
do with
the JCL of today, even more (define your own commands, for example). The
usability of the Telefunken time sharing system was far better than any
other system
at this time, and even later (interactive debuggers, symbolic dumps -
with names from
the source level - and so on; things that appeared again, for me, with
OS/2 in the
1990 years).
For me and others, who worked with this machine, the IBM JCL always looked
very strange.
Kind regards
Bernd
Clark Morris schrieb:
While most of my experience has be MVS and DOS (real not virtual) JCL,
there were some very interesting capabilities in the Unix shell system
used at the HP/UX installation where I was a contractor. This shell
system had GDG capabilities and other things that I don't recall now.
I have also heard the work flow languages for both the large scale
Burrough computes and for the AS400 and i series make JCL look brain
dead. If the work flow language for the i series is as good as I have
heard, then there could be a good case for porting it to both the p
series and the z series.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
