Bernd, I believe REXX has great potential to help in the "new JCL".
But before we go any further in this discussion I need to caution that trying to bring the CMS "batch" model you describe is much more akin to using REXX in (batch) TSO (e.g. PGM=IKJEFT01 or IKJEFT1A or IKJEFT1B). As such it falls prey to the problem that John McKown describes in his reply in this thread. Additionally it has other deficiencies that make it unacceptable, on the other hand the good news is that this capability already exists (as described above) if you want to use it :-) The nature of JCL (today) is a two part process, as can be seen in the name(s) Converter/Interpreter (C/I). In simplistic terms the Converter "compiles" the JCL card images into "internal text" which the Interpreter than evaluates. Thus there is already a clear delineation between the external representation (e.g. JOB, EXEC, DD statements, etc.) and the internal representation that is actually used by the system. By the way, in response to John McKnown's fears I will say take heart :-) You can rest assured that CA-11 does not look at "JCL" but rather it looks at (and modifies) the various control block structures (e.g. SCT, etc.) that the system constructs. This delineation is what Paul Gilmartin referred to in his response in the other thread on this topic (Subject: JCL) as "converter time" vs. "execution time". Strictly speaking "execution time" is not completely accurate but it is close enough for our purposes :-) I would propose that most (all ?) of the complaints regarding JCL can be solved by changes at "converter time". Certainly I believe that the list Paul enumerates can either be dealt with at "converter time" or are outside the scope of "JCL" altogether. I believe that using REXX (largely) as a substitute for the JCL statements we know today has great potential, both from a technical implementation point of view as well as from a usability point of view. The technical and usability requirements are sometimes in conflict but in this instance I think there is a happy congruence :-) There are several reasons that make using REXX for this purpose attractive, in my opinion and if the idea of using REXX holds up to scrutiny I'll be happy to describe them. But before we go to far along this path I would be interested in hearing dissenting opinions or even in hearing more ideas about people would like to see (or not see :-) in JCL. John McDowell ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
