>It's wrong to quietly ignore an unsupported construct. Logging-DDname >in a SYSIN data set mentioned in PARMDD should result in a JCL syntax >error and failure of the job before execution.
Your opinions are always welcome. They are not always agreed with. For this case, I probably agree that a JCL syntax error could have been better. For many other cases I do not agree that it's wrong to quietly ignore. >Might it be more readily be reported in JESYSMSG? It would seem that >since allocation messages appear there that data set is writeable at the >needed time (whether it's in scope for the initiator is a different question) I'll plead ignorance here. That makes sense to me (but I don't know if record length could be a stumbling point). If a request is submitted, it would be useful to mention how necessary it is to show each substituted line in its entirety (possibly spanning multiple messages) or whether the first "n" characters might satisfy. I have not looked at all into just what is logged if logging is done (for the non-PARMDD case). I suppose normally I'd expect to see, for any line that changed due to substitution, the complete "old" and the complete "new". ><quote> Note that logging-DDname is ignored if it is >specified on the DD statement which describes a data set that >is the target on the PARMDD keyword (see PARMDD parameter). </quote> >what I read from the reference url is that EXEC ...,PARMDD=MYLOGDD >along with SYMBOLS=(...,MYLOGDD) should fail. Ignored (usually, and in this case) means ignored. It does not mean rejected. Here it really means ignored. In this case it does not even mean "not processed and we told you about that with an informational message". Peter Relson z/OS Core Technology Design ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
