I'm not saying it is a bad thing, that this requirement is now upon us. It just took me by surprise. I am glad that someone here brought it up. Other than the terrible conversion to VS COBOL II all those years ago, upgrades to the cobol compiler over the years have been pretty pain-free in the shops I have worked in. In fact, it was usually a non-event. We will get there, but the scope of the project to get there just got larger. We will have to convert more than 500 application load libraries to PDSE beforehand. I'm pretty sure that most of them will be converted with a simple DFDSS job assuming there are no "invalid" load modules that cannot be converted to an program object.
//STEP1 EXEC PGM=ADRDSSU,REGION=8M //SYSPRINT DD SYSOUT=* //SYSIN DD * COPY DS(INC(old.PDS)) - CONVERT(PDSE(old.PDS)) - DELETE - ALLX - CATALOG - PURGE /* But there are always the few application load libraries that are always allocated it seems. There are many improvements I see too, but the resource requirements to compile have gone up too. Consider the following statement(s) in the migration guide: "Compile-time storage requirements are substantially increased compared to prior versions of Enterprise COBOL. The compiler requires a minimum of 200M REGION size to run." And "Compile-time CPU time requirements are substantially increased, compared to prior versions of Enterprise COBOL. The compiler may take more than four times as long to compile as the older compilers." _________________________________________________________________ Dave Jousma Assistant Vice President, Mainframe Engineering david.jou...@53.com 1830 East Paris, Grand Rapids, MI 49546 MD RSCB2H p 616.653.8429 f 616.653.2717 -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of John Gilmore Sent: Sunday, September 08, 2013 10:06 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: z/OS 2.1 and tools like COBOL 5.1, Fault Analyzer, Debug Tool, etc Shane's surmise that the PDSE requirement for COBOL 5.1 executables will slow its adoption in many shops is certainly correct. All such requirements do so. Where Shane and I differ, and I suspect that this difference is visceral, is that I am radically impatient with the "conservatism" of these shops, which is making them irrelevant, and he is [legitimately] preoccupied with their current, detailed, operational problems. I do not, of course, deny that there are such problems. They are always with us. Nirvana will not obtain when the current batch have been resolved. They will be succeeded by others of much the same sort. The existence of a set of these problems, whatever its current makeup may be, is not, however, an argument for stasis. John Gilmore, Ashland, MA 01721 - USA ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN This e-mail transmission contains information that is confidential and may be privileged. It is intended only for the addressee(s) named above. If you receive this e-mail in error, please do not read, copy or disseminate it in any manner. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. Please reply to the message immediately by informing the sender that the message was misdirected. After replying, please erase it from your computer system. Your assistance in correcting this error is appreciated. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
