At 10:01 +0300 on 06/12/2011, Binyamin Dissen wrote about Re: DCBs
and DCBEs - Could IBM have done it any worse?:
:>I have a vague memory of cases where an operation returns a success
:>RC but also a subcode that indicates that the classification of
:>success was due to some requests not being serviced or some
:>conditions having occurred that allowed the operation to continue in
:>a degraded mode. This case would, IMO, fall into this type of
:>situation. IOW: You can continue BUT if you do, it will be without
:>the routines that were listed in the DCBE being used.
OPEN RC=4 seems appropriate, and as DCBE is "new" code no downward
compatibility issue.
I agree. A warning message should also be issued so that there is
some documentation of what went wrong for post analysis. A
multi-DCB/ACB open would need to require the program to step though
the CBs to find the error flags (but this is normal in that
situation) and which CB had the partial failure.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
