It worked, once I un-fat-fingered it. Thanks again, Charles
-----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Bill Godfrey Sent: Friday, May 13, 2016 1:03 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Suggestion for conditioning step on symbols On Fri, 13 May 2016 09:39:43 -0700, Charles Mills wrote: >I know this has been kicked around before but I don't have a good >answer off the top of my head and I don't know exactly how to Google for the >answer. > >Does anyone have suggestions for conditioning a jobstep on &symbol1 != >&symbol2? I know that COND= and IF are only on return codes and similar >things, not character strings. > >I could write Rexx that would compare two symbols (or evaluate a >complex >expression) and set a return code -- is that the best approach? Or is >there something off the shelf that would have the same effect? I have a >feeling someone here knows a clever hack. > >Complicating life is that part of what I need to bypass if &symbol1 == >&symbol2 is a DD with DISP=NEW. Can IF bypass an entire step including >DDs (such that DISP=NEW for an existing dataset will not cause errors)? >The examples do not show that. If not, do I solve that by putting the >DD (and EXEC PGM=) in a PROC and IF/ELSE executing one of two >alternative PROCs? Or ... ? One way to set a return code, on systems that allow in-stream substitution (z/OS 2.x JES2) // EXPORT SYMLIST=(PARM1,PARM2) // SET PARM1=FOO // SET PARM2=BAR //COMPARE EXEC PGM=IEBCOMPR //SYSPRINT DD SYSOUT=* //SYSUT1 DD *,SYMBOLS=JCLONLY &PARM1 //SYSUT2 DD *,SYMBOLS=JCLONLY &PARM2 //SYSIN DD DUMMY ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
