Thanks for your comments.
It seems to me that there are two areas of dispute. (a) My recollection
of MVS control blocks etc. As I have not worked as an MVS sysprog for
nearly 12 years, my memory of them is somewhat fuzzy - just as my
knowledge of French (my original academic language), Dutch and Italian
has become over the years. (b) My interpretation of "override" versus
yours. My Collins English dictionary gives the following definitions of
"override": (1) to set aside or disregard with superior authority or
power; (2) to supersede or annul; (3) to dominate or vanquish by or as
if by trampling down; (4) to take manual control of (a system that is
usually under automatic control); (5) to extend or pass over, esp. to
overlap; (6) to ride (a horse) too hard; (7) to ride over or across; (8)
a device or system that can override an automatic control.
In the case of (a), I cannot know which parts of my recollection of MVS
ctlblks are 'blurred' and I have no time to check every one. Their
details can be remembered easily when regularly used.
In the case of (b), your interpretation of "override" seems to match
most closely definition (5); my interpretation matches more closely
definitions (1), (2), (3). As your interpretation seems to be the only
one that matters (in previous years, it was only the Vatican's
interpretation that mattered), I have dropped out of this discussion.
But I maintain that my assertion is correct within the context of my
interpretation of the word "override". The difficulty in arguing a point
here is that the English language is itself ambiguous and imprecise, and
is therefore prone to misinterpretation.
I 'misunderstood' only that assembling etc. a DCB, or substituting one
JCL parm for another, are examples of the correct meaning of "override":
I thought it could have other interpretations, as I tried to explain on
several occasions.
Thanks again for your comments.
Chris Poncelet CEng MBCS CITP
Gerhard Postpischil wrote:
On 8/3/2011 8:38 AM, CM Poncelet wrote:
Well yes, they have to be loaded into VS to be processed. In the
case of block read/writes they precede the data records in the
buffer. But whatever was being discussed at the time I wrote
that had to do with record read/writes, in which case the BDW
and RDW would not be accessible from the buffer: so perhaps I
should have said 'not accessible' instead of 'not loaded'.
And you keep digging a bigger hole. While I have written production
programs in many languages, most of my career was spent on assembler,
on multiple platforms. If you had bothered to look at BSAM and QSAM,
you would not be making these absurd statements. While QSAM has a DATA
mode, normal use of variable format always includes the RDWs. In the
original context, other than references to IEBGENER, there was no
mention of the program's language, so you're on shaky ground; and
IEBGENER definitely uses QSAM, or BSAM, as appropriate, with full
access to the control data.
If I dealt only with MVS, I would have the time to refresh my
memory: but I don't; I work with subsystems. By CCW EXCPs I am
simply emphasising the fact that the channel programs (CPs) are
issuing CCWs (which have direct access to DASD devices).
And more of the same. EXCP is a specific reference to an MVS service,
and the macro used to invoke it. EXCP uses CCWs, CCWs don't use EXCP.
And channel program do not issue CCWs, they are CCWs.
True. I translate my thoughts into words and for this I use
whatever suitable word - not necessarily the most appropriate
one - first comes to mind.
This group is about sharing information about mainframes, and
providing help to people who are stuck. That entails effective
communication, which is not achieved by using well-understood concepts
in inappropriate ways, or creating your own arbitrary definitions for
common words. I get the impression that you misunderstood something in
the original thread, made an inappropriate post, something all of us
have had happen at some stage of our careers, and rather than own up
to the misapprehension, you are trying to argue your way out of it.
That not only wastes everyone's time, but has already made you appear
incredibly foolish.
Gerhard Postpischil
Bradford, VT
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
