strfmon() should do the trick. https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009604599/functions/strfmon.html
> On 5 Mar 2023, at 4:06 am, Rupert Reynolds <rreyno...@cix.co.uk> wrote: > > To explain, I'm writing new PC code. I want the equivalent of EDMK in > (something like) snprintf() format strings to print numbers with optional > floating currency symbol and spaces/commas between thousands. (not > forgetting n,nn,nn,nnn.nn style used in at least one country). > > As far as I can see, snprintf() format strings can't handle it, but PL/I > and even assembly (EDMK) make this easy. > > Is there a common standard I should look at, please? > > e.g. format 1234.56 with "$999,999,990.00" > leads to " $1,234.56". > > I'm not going to be choosy about input data type--it's the presentation > that matters and I'd rather not reinvent the wheel. > > Any suggestions, please? > > Roops > >> On Sat, 4 Mar 2023, 18:39 Mike Schwab, <mike.a.sch...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342570694_Coupling_Facility_Configuration_Options_-_Updated_2020 >> >> CF is not counted on SCRT, shown on RMF reports. >> Won't cost you on z/OS, may on some vendors. >> >> Thin CFs go to enabled wait when work is completed, restart when >> interrupt says there is work. >> >> Estimate is 3% light sharing to 13% heaving sharing (of z/OS workload). >> >> Thin CF would use internal links so no I/O overhead to another CPU. >> >>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 9:35 PM Laurence Chiu <lch...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> The situation. >>> >>> We share a couple of Z13's with another (larger client). Z13 B is where >> we >>> run our development LPARs and Z13 A is production. >>> >>> For critical business reasons an online application on our production >> LPAR >>> needs to be highly available and that means in a parallel sysplex. But >> our >>> outsourcer has told us it cannot be done for the following reasons >> because >>> there are no spare ICF engines on the host B - all are being used by >> other >>> CF instances, either to support production Sysplexes or development ones >>> (not ours). >>> >>> Host A does potentially have a spare ICF engine we could use to support a >>> production parallel Sysplex but good practice does recommend you create a >>> test one first of course. >>> >>> I then asked the question, if host A has a spare ICF engine, can't it be >>> used to support a CF to be used by the test Sysplex on B. I was advised >>> this was not possible since there are no spare connections between host A >>> and Host B (Infiniband possibly) so the Sysplex on B could not actually >>> communicate with the CF on A. >>> >>> Our requirement for the Sysplex is primarily to be able to share a VSAM >>> dataset which is hit every time a transaction comes in with a peak of >> about >>> 99tps. So we would need VSAM RLS to share the dataset records between the >>> two application instances. There is no DB2, CICS or IMS so I think the >> only >>> structures in the CF are those to support VSAM RLS, maybe some XCF >>> structures and core systems. >>> >>> Knowing that we would only bring up the test sysplex to make sure >>> transactions routed correctly across the two LPARs and most of the time >> we >>> would have one member of the Sysplex off, I suggested that the test CF >>> could be built using a CP. To this suggestion I received the following >>> (anti) advice >>> - there would be MSU costs (we don't care since we think the MIPS load on >>> the CF would be low). Plus we would ask that the CF be defined with >> Dynamic >>> Coupling Facility Dispatch and set DYNDISP=THIN. Since that CF is going >> to >>> be idling most of the time, MSU consumption is not going to be a major >> cost. >>> - it's strongly recommended not to do this by IBM. Yet when I read this >>> document >>> >>> https://www.ibm.com/downloads/cas/JZB2E38Q >>> the option is discussed in great detail and the only negatives are the >>> incurring of MSU costs and some performance degradation if both a z/OS >> and >>> CF LPAR are trying to use the same CP at the same time. But this can be >>> managed. >>> >>> - that a CF running on a CP would need a dedicated CP engine and there >> are >>> no spare engines in host B. That totally flies against the information I >>> have read from IBM docs. >>> >>> Of course for production the CF on host A would be configured to use an >> ICF >>> engine (or share one) >>> >>> Finally, while I accepted the argument at the time there were no >>> connections between Host A and Host B, further reading suggests that you >> do >>> not need to dedicate channels for communications but use XCF or by using >>> Infiniband sub channels or sharing the same physical link with more than >>> one Sysplex. Then the issue of running the CF on a CP goes away since I >> can >>> ask for two CF's to be defined on host A, one for production and one for >>> test and DCFC ensures that that production CF is not impacted by the >>> development one. >>> >>> A lot to digest here but I really want to have some authoritative data in >>> order to refute most of the comments being our outsourcer. >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN >> >> >> >> -- >> Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA >> Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
