John Gilmore wrote: >There is thus no excuse for any use of an STCK instruction in NEW >code. Old code is a different matter, If it is judged that there is >NO possibility that it will still be in use in 2042, STCKs in it need >not be replaced. Otherwise they should be.
How about code that's generating SMF records? That's what we're dealing with here. Yeah, 2042 might be an issue, but the programs that digest the records can actually deal with that (and will have to, or SMF in general will by then). ...phsiii ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
