On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 09:03:18 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: > on 09/09/2013 at 09:32 PM, Paul Gilmartin said: > >><RHETORIC> Why does DSN(*) exist at all? </RHETORIC> > >To accomodate batch applications under TSO. > >>What you suggest is more like batch than interactive. > >EDIT is like batch? In what way? > >>It was a program which issued prompts to DD SYSTERM > >I don't know what "it" is, but EDIT did *NOT* issue prompts to DD >SYSTERM. EDIT used standard TSO services for terminal I/O. > Sometimes it appears that you deliberately over-prune quoted material so you can refute something the previous poster never said. "It" was my program (or the user's), not EDIT. And editing a file to supply as input to a program rather than replying to prompts with a terminal makes the operation of that program more batch-like than interactive, regardless that the editor operated interactively.
On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 09:12:41 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: > >>But how much IBM software in 1978 actually exploited it? > >Batch or interactive? IBM interactive software exploited lower case >long before the date you asked about. > The appropriate metaphor is that OS/360 et seq. support lower case in about the same sense that the noose supports the hanged man. >>TTY 33 ASR > >Did the 33 even support lower case? What did you see with, e.g., a >2741? > 33 by folding; I was never afflicted with a 2741. >>Later, using CDC Kronos, > >Display code didn't have lower case. I believe that with NOS and >NOS/BE CDC switched to ASCII, which did have LC. > In it later days, Kronos provided lower case as digraphs in Display Code. Cumbersome, but so is UTF-8 in similar respects. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
