In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 09/04/2006
at 09:45 AM, Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>Now the issue is does the "setting" of the dimensions in the BIND
>have to be reflected in the "configuring" of the device or emulator?
The BIND be consistent with the setting in order to be accepted. Thus,
on a 3180, a BIND with a 43x80 primary would be rejected if the model
number was set to 2 but accepted if the model number was set to 2+[1].
>As I remember the 3278 models, you typically "matched" the BIND to
>the model number - very irritating.
Or used D4C32XX3, which would work for any model number.
>I know I'll be corrected if I'm mistaken, but was it possible to
>deny yourself part of the available display surface and "set", using
>the 7E and 7F options (and the 02 option), a number of rows less
>that the number available?[1]
Yes, with model numbers 2+, 3+, 4+, 5+, 6, 7, 8 and 9 you could use a
BIND that set fewer rows than the available space. I never had cause
to do so.
>Using your terminology, this would still be "configuring" so that
>the "values" would be "accepted".
No, the configuring takes place before the BIND, and determines what
values will be accepted in the BIND.
>I've checked through all the posts in this thread and I see that,
>for example, nowhere is there any comment that whatever 3270
>emulator happened to be in use needs any particular attention when,
>for example, Edward Jaffe's favourite dimensions 51x80 and 62x132
>are specified.
There were two issues mentioned:
1. Applications that can only handle row lengths of 80, 132 and 160,
or not even all of those.
2. Applications that can not handle 14-bit addressing.
>What program, the application program or the 3270 emulator (or
>simulator) program?
Simulator, of course.
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 08/29/2006
at 04:39 AM, Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>How does this comment have any relevance to what I said?
Thus 24 rows and 80 columns are always returned in the default
fields of the "Query Reply" and so they are not configured
anywhere.
What is sent in the Query Reply is determined by what was in the BIND.
>I've tried to give above my understanding of the progression of
>increasing flexibility - partial of course - but I believe that
>current 3270 emulators do *not* need any "configuration" statements
>in order to have presentation space dimensions imposed by the 7F
>(and 7E) options.
Which 3270 simulators? They're all different.
>Otherwise how do you explain the possibility to "set" a default set
>of dimensions other than 24 rows and 80 columns in PCOMM which, as
>we know, does not permit the default dimensions to be "configured"?
Which is it? In either case, I explain it as being because PCOMM is
PCOMM and not some randomly selected other 3270 simulator.
>You may care to mention what sort of work was necessary
>("configuring") on your favourite 3270 devices, the 3180 and 3192,
>when you wanted ("set") default ("primary") 43x80 and alternate
>("secondary") 27x132.
I had to configure the model number to something other than 2-5 and I
had to use a LOGMODE whose BIND specified the desired primary and
secondary sizes.
>It's interesting that these dimensions correspond to the traditional
>3278 display models, specifically 4 and 5.
Not really; the 3180 would not support more than 27 lines with a 132
character width and would not support more than 43 lines with an 80
character width. Since it was intended as a replacement for models 2-5
of the 3278, those limits were hardly surprising.
[1] Unless I'm confusing the 3180 nomenclature with the 3192, in
which case change the 2+ to 6.
--
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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
