> Resistance to replacing JCL comes from the fact that "everybody knows JCL"
I haven't seen resistance to replacing JCL, just resistance to removing functionality and doubt as to feasibility. So far nothing that has been proposed actually does what JCL does. That said, there's lots of room for improvement. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu> on behalf of Hobart Spitz <orexx...@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2018 8:37 AM To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu Subject: Re: REXX as JCL replacement The JOL effort is commendable, but replacing JCL is about much more than a nicer syntax or easy movement between foreground and background. At the risk of repetition, other reasons are (1) to eliminate the separation between scripting code and application code and (2) to interface with other software/data (files, DB2, ISPF, etc.). Resistance to replacing JCL comes from the fact that "everybody knows JCL" (which they don't really). Everybody (in the target audience) knows REXX, if not directly, then because REXX has many well-know features of other languages. JCL resembles only mainframe assembler. Add in PIPElines and you get a productivity and performance improvements unlike any other option available. Charles's example in REXX and PIPElines might look like this. 1. "pipe (end ?) ? < trans | v: validate | g: gate", 2. "? v: sort 10.10 | g:| u: update | >" GDG("payroll.master(+1)")", 3. "? <" GDG("payroll.master(0)") | u:" 4. 5. if RC = 0 then 6. "submit job2" 7. else 8. "delete" GDG("payroll.master(0)") I tried to stay true to Charles's example. If you can to skip invalid transactions, but still process valid ones (a reasonable approach), you can eliminate the GATE and combine the first two streams. GDG() is a function that I've previously written. Note that zero intermediate files are needed, saving those I/O operations. I haven't read the details of JOL, so I might be missing something. I'm happy to be educated. OREXXMan JCL is the buggy whip of 21st century computing. Stabilize it. Put Pipelines in the z/OS base. Would you rather process data one character at a time (Unix/C style), or one record at a time? IBM has been looking for an HLL for program products; REXX is that language. On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 6:40 AM, David Crayford <dcrayf...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11/07/2018 7:19 AM, Clem Clarke wrote: > >> Don't know about that! I always think that IBM has some of the best >> people and concepts. Pity IBM didn't push PL/I instead od allowing C to >> rule the world. >> >> > They did, but something that's free will always be more attractive. > Multics was originally written in PL/I but the UNIX devs didn't think it > was suitable for operating systems. > > However, there's an interesting IBM lab in Perth that has some excellent >> people. Not many people know about it. >> > > Not any more! They all got the push when IBM recently cut their workforce. > A few of them moved to HCL with the PD products. The rest of them are > looking for work. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
