The IBM C compiler certainly documents their compiler diagnostic messages.

http://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSLTBW_2.2.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r2.cbcdg01/cbcdg0112.htm


In article <2836163560113018.wa.bill.woodgergmail....@listserv.ua.edu> you 
wrote:
> Ed,

> You're either pulling my leg, or accidentally conflating two things, I think.


> "As the result of a SHARE requirement, we were able to
> apply resources to getting the COBOL Performance
> Tuning Paper updated for COBOL V4R2
> ? The last time it was updated was for COBOL V3R1, 2001"

> That's from a Tom Ross presentation at SHARE in Anaheim in 2011.

> With V5.1 the Performance Tuning document appeared 14 months after the 
> product.

> With V6.1 the Performance Tuning document appeared at GA.

> I don't think anyone will ever seriously ask for the documentation of the 
> COBOL compiler messages. OK, individuals will, even individual organisations, 
>  but the wider response will be "you want IBM to spend hundreds of thousands 
> of dollars on something which does no more than restate the text of the 
> messages"?

> It's like the people who "comment" lines like the following in a COBOL 
> program:

> MOVE some-descriptive-data-name TO some-other-descriptive-data-name

> COBOL runtime messages are documented, in the Language Environment Runtime 
> Messages, and they always have been, in various places.

> As far as I'm aware, there has never been any documentation of the compiler 
> diagnostic messages for any IBM Mainframe compiler, going back to Full 
> American Naitonal Standard COBOL at least.

> If there are individual messages that someone thinks are unclear (and it 
> should actually be so, to have any point in the process), then let IBM know 
> and they will look into it. I reported one, and my source says Tom Ross 
> himself fixed it (a V4 message referred to a V3 document).

> Now, if anyone does want to commission the documentation of the Enterprise 
> COBOL diagnostic messages, I'm available.

> On Sunday, 20 March 2016 00:21:07 UTC, Ed Gould  wrote:
> > It figures. They probably dropped it (again) figuring no one would  
> > notice.
> > Time for a SHARE req. Anyone?
> > 
> > Ed

-- 
Don Poitras - SAS Development  -  SAS Institute Inc. - SAS Campus Drive
sas...@sas.com           (919) 531-5637                Cary, NC 27513

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to