In <5499902479450252.wa.paulgboulderaim....@listserv.ua.edu>, on 08/08/2013 at 11:07 AM, Paul Gilmartin <paulgboul...@aim.com> said:
>On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 16:43:41 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: > >>>Alas, IBM developers abandoned this paradigm. One writes to the >>>operator's console not using QSAM, but WTO; one writes to the TSO >>>terminal not using QSAM to SYSTSPRT, but TPUT. >> >>Actually, they DTRT in *those* cases, IMHO. Writing to the operator is >>more than a simple I/O, at least with MCS, and if you open a QSAM DCB >>with the ddname allocated to the terminal then you can use GET and PUT >>transparently. >> >Ummm... I believe that in a conventional TSO terminal session >SYSTSPRT isn't even allocated. 1. There's nothing special about SYSTSPRT. It's only relevance is that the TMP in batch creates a stack element for the ddnames SYSTSIN and SYSTSPRT. 2. Your JCL determines what is allocated. There's nothing in TSO that allocates any hardwired ddname. 3. You can allocate a ddname to the terminal both in JCL and in dynamic allocation. QSAM doesn't depend on the ddname being SYSTSIN or SYSTSPRT. -- 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 lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN