In
<93891f43642f3c419a7d75acc2b1db6f3c04e1e...@exchangemb2.dhs.state.ia.us>,
on 11/02/2011
at 11:13 AM, "Roberts, John J" <jrobe...@dhs.state.ia.us> said:
>They may not have been in PCP.
PCP used the same JCL as MFT and MVT
>But I am 99% certain they were in OS MFT R18
Assuming that you mean OS/360 R18 generated for MFT, that was rather
late in the game. As I recall, symbolic parameters were added in
Release 14. If proc was not in the original design, it would have to
have been added before that, well before your experience.
>But if instead they had made a clean separation between the
>expansion of the PROC with symbol resolution from the later phase to
>interpret all the JCL primitives
Be careful what you ask for - you might get it.
>that would have been a much cleaner design IMO.
It would have been far more awkward for the end user. In fact, IBM
partially implemented your idea and, sure enough, it did make it more
awkward for the user.
>And they could have provided TYPRUN=PUNCH to allow you to extract
>the primitive JCL after PROC/symbol resolution.
They're already there, as messages.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
