I may (a while ago - in the past) have mislead Clark.
There is DEFINITELY a difference between coding
Block Contains 1
versus
omitting the Block CONTAINS clause
(for output files)
The former creates a RECFM=FB/BM file (with one record per block)
while
the latter produces a RECFM=F/V file
Personally, neither are USUALLY the "desired" results, but they are
different.
<howard.bra...@cusys.edu> wrote in message
news:<jps215p3ha8d7g7qvn2j1cigaqq8939...@4ax.com>...
> On 15 May 2009 18:08:22 -0700, cfmpub...@ns.sympatico.ca (Clark
> Morris) wrote:
>
> >I checked the reference you gave and for QSAM files, if the BLOCK
> >CONTAINS clause is omitted, BLOCK 1 RECORD is assumed. This stupidity
> >has aggravated me for years.
>
> The whole idea of (IBM mainframe) CoBOL still caring about blocksize
> is irritating. The "fix" of making BLOCK CONTAINS 0 is IMHO, not the
> way fixes should be.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
