-----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 3:13 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: remove() of PDSE member leaves PDS locked
On Mon, 2 Aug 2010 14:38:08 -0500, William H. Blair wrote: > >For there to have been a "rationale" (for a decision or choice) >there would have to have been a decision or choice (not to call >STOW to delete the member). There never was such a decision made >so there was (and is) no need to justify something that never, >in fact, happened. > >> Nowadays the only rationale, spurious, is that "it's always >> been that way." And ever shall be, as long as descendants of >> OS/360 endure. > >Nope. There is [still] no "rationale" because there has never >been any consideration of the issue -- serious or otherwise. > Mentally reviewing this thread, ... I see "never been any consideration" as a failure of the designers to step back and ask themselves, "What will be the customers' perception of this behavior?" <snippage> The customers in those days actually read the doc and could, in many cases, program the thing from the display station as well as wire the plug boards for the external units. So, the customers came to see that DISP= was a DATA SET LEVEL disposition. At least this customer had that understanding. And when I wrote this for a Univac system, their equivalent of disposition was for the file not the data within the file. Regards, Steve Thompson ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
