On Wednesday, 09/27/2006 at 09:14 MST, "Schuh, Richard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It is not that it has not been changed fast enough, it is that it was > overlooked when changes were being made. Please, let's not get back to the BAD > vs. WAD wars from days of the conversion from 370 to XA. This is no different > than that. Nobody said it was a new CP "thingie". To the contrary, it is simply > something overlooked that should be fixed. If that fix must be made at a
> release level, so be it. Clarification: It was not overlooked. We did not *intend* to remove the aforementioned "thingie" in z/VM 5.2. > Look at it from a customer's point of view. There are those who may never have > occasion to encounter the problem of this particular design "feature". They > could not care less. Then there are those who do not think they will be able to > make it through next year if that "feature" has not been fixed. We happen to > fall into the latter of the two categories. To us, it is definitely a flaw, not > a feature. It is not a bug, nor is it a feature (of either persuasion). It is very simply a remnant of the 31-bit design that was left in place so that you would not have to wait 10 years for us to completely rewrite Everything. Of course, no matter what we call them, we recognize the impact of such constraints on your business and we continue to work on lifting the Most Important constraints where justified by customer growth and demand. And as Ben Franklin would have said, I'm sure: "A constraint lifted is a constraint revealed." Or something. The point being that there is no end to the constraints. We are limited only by physics, time, and our imaginations. Oh, and money. Did I mention money? :-) Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
