Properly integrating OOREXX with TSO is a problem. Supporting legacy datasets should not be difficult, nor should an equivalent to IRXJCL. I'm not sure about System REXX. I would expect IBM to functionally stabilize EXECIO unless there is something that it does better than stream I/O.
Is requiring an OMVS segment in the ESM an issue if OOREXX supports legacy datasets? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Farley, Peter x23353 [0000031df298a9da-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu] Sent: Tuesday, January 4, 2022 2:18 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: ... Re: Top 8 Reasons for using Python instead of REXX for z/OS ISTM that the real challenge is to port oorexx to run as a regular TSO / Batch program under z/OS (and not requiring the USS shell to run it) just like existing TSO Rexx programs can do where it has full knowledge of how to read/write at least sequential MVS datasets in addition to USS path files from JCL. "EXECIO" support not required but a possible plus. And of course full ADDRESS MVS/TSO/etc. support as well. A clean, complete and suitably enhanced port that can fully replace the existing TSO/Rexx support is what nobody has managed to accomplish so far. Peter -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On Behalf Of René Jansen Sent: Tuesday, January 4, 2022 2:06 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: ... Re: Top 8 Reasons for using Python instead of REXX for z/OS We have daily builds for ooRExx on Z for Linux on Z on our build machine. These run on Suse, Red Hat and Ubuntu. JDBC to DB2 works like on every Linux, to DB2 on z/OS or Linux, Unix, Windows (luw). There is more on the mainframe than z/OS - although this does not mean that I would like to see that port. An OO version of Rexx for USS could use the existing environments for Rexx; the existing OO version of Rexx, NetRexx, which runs on USS has ‘knowledge’ of conventional MVS filesystems, spool and other facilities and addressing environments via JZOS. Although, strictly spoken, ZFS is a z/OS filesystem and the I/O Macros are very alike. But I know what you mean and it is a subject of much speculation why Rexx on z/OS is stuck on 4.02 - or is it? Best regards, René. > On 4 Jan 2022, at 14:15, Jeremy Nicoll <jn.ls.mfrm...@letterboxes.org> wrote: > > Presumably an ooREXX compiled under SUSE Linux gives one something > with no knowledge of, for example, z/OS file systems, let alone any of > the environments supported under TSO REXX. -- This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your system. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
