I don't see the need for this detailisme. I don't know nor care how the
command processor gets the next command.
Sorry! I didn't mean to offend you with details.
I was just trying to understand how CNTCLIST
differentiates between the two options.
I was under the impression that TGET did indeed
trigger the SYSEVENT which is why someone
banging away on the <enter> key give the
appearance of lots of short transactions.
From: "Vernooy, C.P. - SPLXM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: TSO WLM Transaction Boundaries (was: What do you call
something like QMF?)
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 15:38:36 +0200
"J R" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >No, based on the start of each command in the CLIST.
>
> And that would be a GETLINE within a CLIST and TGET without.
>
> It comes down to whether the command was acquired from the stack or
the
> terminal.
>
>
I don't see the need for this detailisme. I don't know nor care how the
command processor gets the next command. As said with the VLF
discussion, a CLIST is processed in phases, so the actual "getting" of
the next command can as well be a next row in an array. Anyway, the
SYSEVENT is issued when the next command is EXECuted, if requested by
CNTCLIST.
TGET reads the command from the terminal. Subsequent execution of the
command will trigger the SYSEVENT, so definitely not the TGET, if you
look at it with this level of detail.
Kees.
_________________________________________________________________
Dont miss your chance to WIN $10,000 and other great prizes from Microsoft
Office Live http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/aub0540003042mrt/direct/01/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
