SV: Use of sequence numbering in current HLASM source?
Who dropped the deck ? Regards Thomas Berg __ Thomas Berg Specialist SMS/AM SWEDBANK AB (Publ) -Ursprungligt meddelande- Från: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] För Kirk Talman Skickat: den 7 november 2012 22:42 Till: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Ämne: Re: Use of sequence numbering in current HLASM source? I would prefer the 083 sorter. Nothing made me appreciate computers and mag tape so much as sorting 6 million cards on 12 columns, the first of which was alphanumeric. 18 machines, 5 people, days and yes I would like to be buried face down 9 edge first. :-) IBM Mainframe Assembler List ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU wrote on 11/07/2012 12:06:13 PM: From: McKown, John john.mck...@healthmarkets.com To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU, Date: 11/07/2012 12:19 PM Subject: Re: Use of sequence numbering in current HLASM source? Sent by: IBM Mainframe Assembler List ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU What! You don't have an IBM 088 collator handy? How do you do daily processing? grin/ -- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets(r) 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone * john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company(r), Mid- West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER- l...@listserv.uga.edu] On Behalf Of John Gilmore Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 10:09 AM To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: Re: Use of sequence numbering in current HLASM source? I have not used sequence numbers, CAPS ON, and the like for many years. Those who have sentimental attachments to things of this sort---old habits die hard in some bailiwicks---are and should be free to use them. Specious arguments for their continued use are, of course, easy to construct; but even if I had a source-program deck to drop, I should be hard put to find the piece of unit-record equipment---What was it called?---required to put it back in sequence. --jg - The information contained in this communication (including any attachments hereto) is confidential and is intended solely for the personal and confidential use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, dissemination, copying, or unauthorized use of this information, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message. Thank you
Re: Use of sequence numbering in current HLASM source?
In addition to IEBUPDTE, you should include z/VM, where XEDIT and the CMS UPDATE command also make use of sequence numbers. Several decades ago, I wrote a code development library system based around these commands, and z/VM development still uses similar technology to develop and maintain the product. Ray Mansell... On 11/7/2012 10:21 AM, McKown, John wrote: I know where our love of putting sequence numbers in columns 73-80 comes from. But the only thing that I know of that continues to really use them is IEBUPDTE.
Re: Use of sequence numbering in current HLASM source?
From: Thomas Berg Who dropped the deck ? Randy did... It was Friday late afternoon. Randy was in a rush to leave. He was already late and his project was late. He dropped a nearly full tray, close to 2000 cards of COBOL source decks, laced with compile, link, data generator and exec JCL. This is the only time I ever saw a grown-up man sit on the floor and literally sob and cry !! (ca.'68/69 at CNR). During program development, when the *combo* of program name or id plus seq.numbers were most needed, they were nearly always absent, unreliable or virtually useless. Randy's tray contained: JESaa*ESb*ESc*ES*ESkk*ESttt*// where: J job card E exec proc card S sysin dd * */* a b c ... t module source decks, object decks, link-edit, test data Best was _ALL_ of this: Interpreted cards with punched program-id + seq.no, using both white and colored cards and lastly, maintaining felt pen marks across to top of each deck. Today? Occasionally a nice and handy feature in desperate need for a new purpose! Andreas F. Geissbuehler
Re: Use of sequence numbering in current HLASM source?
On 8 November 2012 15:41, Ray Mansell r...@mansell.org wrote: In addition to IEBUPDTE, you should include z/VM, where XEDIT and the CMS UPDATE command also make use of sequence numbers. Several decades ago, I wrote a code development library system based around these commands, and z/VM development still uses similar technology to develop and maintain the product. And we also use an update identifier just before the sequence number (XEDIT can put it there). This leaves very little room for the code (and a good excuse to have sparse remarks on the code). Now that disk space is less of a concern, we're moving the sequence number further to the right for REXX code for example (like record length of 97 to leave 80 bytes for the program source). One of the virtues of CMS UPDATE is that you can actually have different code streams share the updates, as long as they don't bite each other (like when you work on a new major release, still being able to make changes to the current level). I can't think of strong enough punishment for those who came up with the idea to manually put a change history in the source code which normally makes it completely impossible to take an update out... Source management tools should keep track of which fixes are applied (and not rely on the programmer who might forget the manual logging). When needed, a build process can generate audit trails in the object code (like we put the list of all update files with time stamps into the object code). /soapbox Rob
Re: Use of sequence numbering in current HLASM source?
On Nov 8, 2012, at 09:14, Rob van der Heij wrote: One of the virtues of CMS UPDATE is that you can actually have different code streams share the updates, as long as they don't bite each other (like when you work on a new major release, still being able to make changes to the current level). ... I've worked that way; it's very effective. ISPF Edit sorely lacks the ability to generate update files for IEBUPDTE or whatever. And IEBUPDTE lacks the hierarchy of control files supported by CMS UPDATE. SuperC (ISPF or HLASM TK) will generate either UPDCMS8 or UPDMVS8 delta files. Infuriatingly, inexplicably, UPDMVS8 requires that both the OLD and NEW inputs have valid sequence numbers; UPDCMS8 imposes no such restriction on NEW. To generate IEBUPDTE control streams, I use UPDCMS8 plus a Rexx filter to convert to IEBUPDTE input format. ... I can't think of strong able to make changes to the current level). I can't think of strong enough punishment for those who came up with the idea to manually put a change history in the source code which normally makes it completely impossible to take an update out... ??? But if lines are added to the change history by the same update process, doesn't taking an update out likewise revert the change history? ... Source management tools should keep track of which fixes are applied (and not rely on the programmer who might forget the manual logging). But yes, that's the better way. -- gil
Re: Use of sequence numbering in current HLASM source?
On 8 November 2012 18:33, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com wrote: ... I can't think of strong able to make changes to the current level). I can't think of strong enough punishment for those who came up with the idea to manually put a change history in the source code which normally makes it completely impossible to take an update out... ??? But if lines are added to the change history by the same update process, doesn't taking an update out likewise revert the change history? For example EXECUPDT has the option to append a change history to the generated updated file. It also removes certain comment blocks (because the output is often shipped in readable format). Or you have cards in the text deck that get reported in the module load map (and by many people compared with the previous version to spot wrong versions picked up etc). That's all out-of-band stuff and does not impact your update files. If you really have to include an update trail in the source code itself, then do it reverse order so each line will case the update to insert after the line that starts the section. When a colleague decided to do it chronologically because it looks better the entry for update N was positioned after the update N-1 making it impossible to take one of them out. Rob
Use of sequence numbering in current HLASM source?
I know where our love of putting sequence numbers in columns 73-80 comes from. But the only thing that I know of that continues to really use them is IEBUPDTE. So I'm wondering if it is really worth the bother to have them anymore. Now, most here would likely say what bother? ISPF makes it easy. True. *If* you are using the ISPF editor and keep your HLASM source code in a RECFM=FB,LRECL=80 data set. It may not be as well known here as in other fora, but I have a real liking for UNIX (and Linux). I mainly keep my source in z/OS UNIX files in specific subdirectories instead of as members in a PDS. I have also fallen in love with FLOWASM's free format input for HLASM. And, recently, I have gotten to liking using git on Linux for change control (it is a version control system such as CVS, Subversion, ...). So I am now often keeping a copy of my source in Linux as well. Since I can't use git in z/OS UNIX because I cannot find a port of it. So, other than being non main stream and even obsessively weird, is there any *technical* reason to maintain sequence numbers? -- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets(r) 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone * john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM
Re: Use of sequence numbering in current HLASM source?
On Nov 7, 2012, at 08:21, McKown, John wrote: I know where our love of putting sequence numbers in columns 73-80 comes from. But the only thing that I know of that continues to really use them is IEBUPDTE. ... So, other than being non main stream and even obsessively weird, is there any *technical* reason to maintain sequence numbers? Some of our anti-obsessively weird developers have insisted that it makes it easier to cite passages in code reviews. Their numbers are dwindling as we too use a UNIX-based source control system. But get Shmuel's opinion. -- gil
Re: Use of sequence numbering in current HLASM source?
I stopped using sequence numbers years ago, even though for 99% of my editing I use ISPF. As long as your source code maintenance software doesn't require it (most don't these days) I see no reason at all to use it. IMHO it clutters the translator/compiler listing with useless information. Whichever language I am working in (HLASM, COBOL Rexx, JCL/PROC, whatever), I mark the lines that I need to change with an identifying string or comment to leave the bread crumbs other maintainers will need to identify what I changed. No need for sequence numbers that I can see. I also haven't used IEBUPDTE in so long I would have to go back to the manual to figure out how to use it again. When I had the privilege of working in a VM environment decades ago, I used to make extensive use of the VMUPDATE facility to maintain software. IIRC even that excellent facility doesn't use sequence numbers but relative line number, but I could be mis-remembering that. Peter -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of McKown, John Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 10:21 AM To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: Use of sequence numbering in current HLASM source? I know where our love of putting sequence numbers in columns 73-80 comes from. But the only thing that I know of that continues to really use them is IEBUPDTE. So I'm wondering if it is really worth the bother to have them anymore. Now, most here would likely say what bother? ISPF makes it easy. True. *If* you are using the ISPF editor and keep your HLASM source code in a RECFM=FB,LRECL=80 data set. It may not be as well known here as in other fora, but I have a real liking for UNIX (and Linux). I mainly keep my source in z/OS UNIX files in specific subdirectories instead of as members in a PDS. I have also fallen in love with FLOWASM's free format input for HLASM. And, recently, I have gotten to liking using git on Linux for change control (it is a version control system such as CVS, Subversion, ...). So I am now often keeping a copy of my source in Linux as well. Since I can't use git in z/OS UNIX because I cannot find a port of it. So, other than being non main stream and even obsessively weird, is there any *technical* reason to maintain sequence numbers? -- This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your system.
Re: Use of sequence numbering in current HLASM source?
On 11/7/2012 7:21 AM, McKown, John wrote: So, other than being non main stream and even obsessively weird, is there any *technical* reason to maintain sequence numbers? We got rid of sequence numbers in the majority of our HLASM source code long ago. Only source code that is distributed to customers (for exits and such) has them. -- Edward E Jaffe Phoenix Software International, Inc 831 Parkview Drive North El Segundo, CA 90245 310-338-0400 x318 edja...@phoenixsoftware.com http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/
Re: Use of sequence numbering in current HLASM source?
I have not used sequence numbers, CAPS ON, and the like for many years. Those who have sentimental attachments to things of this sort---old habits die hard in some bailiwicks---are and should be free to use them. Specious arguments for their continued use are, of course, easy to construct; but even if I had a source-program deck to drop, I should be hard put to find the piece of unit-record equipment---What was it called?---required to put it back in sequence. --jg
Re: Use of sequence numbering in current HLASM source?
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 10:21 AM, McKown, John john.mck...@healthmarkets.com wrote: ...snip... So, other than being non main stream and even obsessively weird, is there any *technical* reason to maintain sequence numbers? -- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT John, We use sequence numbers to extract change lines from edited source modules. The developer making the change maintains the sequence numbers on new or on changed lines he adds/changes. When the change is finished, he then uses SUPERC with process option UPDMVS8 and compares the new changed source module to the prior release of that same source module. SUPERC then emits a change file in IEBUPDTE format. Those change files (we call them 'delta' files) identify which lines were changed and how. Multiple such delta files can then be saved and applied later, or backed out if need be. This lets more than one developer work on the same source module at the same time. It ain't CVS, but it works -- Mike Shaw MVS/QuickRef Support Group Chicago-Soft, Ltd.
Re: Use of sequence numbering in current HLASM source?
For all types that I retrieve from Endevor (cobol asm macro copybook jcl proc parm ...) 73-80 is worse than useless. The first thing I do when the element is in my library is to do REN;UNNUM to eliminate them. If they exist and if you use ISPF edit and if you have no bnds (and in some cases if you do) they come into the useable area when the ( line command is used. At one time there was an attempt here to use 73-80 for change control. Since they are not on the normal ISPF edit screen on a 80 character wide green screen, they were too easy to lose. For cobol 1-6 tends to be used for change control. For asm, there is less discipline. I tend to use 68-71. One of the great features of asm is that comments can be on a line of code. That is one of the greatest annoyances of cobol. A construct like /*...*/ is very desirable. IBM Mainframe Assembler List ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU wrote on 11/07/2012 10:21:28 AM: From: McKown, John john.mck...@healthmarkets.com I know where our love of putting sequence numbers in columns 73-80 comes from. But the only thing that I know of that continues to really use them is IEBUPDTE. So I'm wondering if it is really worth the bother to have them anymore. Now, most here would likely say what bother? ISPF makes it easy. True. *If* you are using the ISPF editor and keep your HLASM source code in a RECFM=FB,LRECL=80 data set. It may not be as well known here as in other fora, but I have a real liking for UNIX (and Linux). I mainly keep my source in z/OS UNIX files in specific subdirectories instead of as members in a PDS. I have also fallen in love with FLOWASM's free format input for HLASM. And, recently, I have gotten to liking using git on Linux for change control (it is a version control system such as CVS, Subversion, ...). So I am now often keeping a copy of my source in Linux as well. Since I can't use git in z/OS UNIX because I cannot find a port of it. So, other than being non main stream and even obsessively weird, is there any *technical* reason to maintain sequence numbers? John McKown - The information contained in this communication (including any attachments hereto) is confidential and is intended solely for the personal and confidential use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, dissemination, copying, or unauthorized use of this information, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message. Thank you
Re: Use of sequence numbering in current HLASM source?
What! You don't have an IBM 088 collator handy? How do you do daily processing? grin/ -- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets(r) 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone * john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER- l...@listserv.uga.edu] On Behalf Of John Gilmore Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 10:09 AM To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: Re: Use of sequence numbering in current HLASM source? I have not used sequence numbers, CAPS ON, and the like for many years. Those who have sentimental attachments to things of this sort---old habits die hard in some bailiwicks---are and should be free to use them. Specious arguments for their continued use are, of course, easy to construct; but even if I had a source-program deck to drop, I should be hard put to find the piece of unit-record equipment---What was it called?---required to put it back in sequence. --jg
Re: Use of sequence numbering in current HLASM source?
On 11/7/2012 10:21 AM, McKown, John wrote: So, other than being non main stream and even obsessively weird, is there any *technical* reason to maintain sequence numbers? I think this is another religious issue not worth fighting over. Some programs are maintained with strict sequence numbers, and a utility such as IEBUPDTE or IEBUPDTX is used to maintain changes. (Does anyone still use IEBUPDAT?). There are some reasons for this use, such as maintenance of commercial software, but even that is declining. Some programs maintain sequence numbers, but with frequent alteration (RENUM, etc.). These I rely upon heavily. For one, they make it easier to disambiguate roughly similar code sequences (more prevalent in assembler?). More importantly, they make it trivially simple to edit code after reading a virtual or physical program listing (Locating by line number rather than search). Gerhard Postpischil Bradford, Vermont
Re: Use of sequence numbering in current HLASM source?
So, in summary, use them or not as the individual or company dictates. I don't really lose any capability by keeping my source as I do, without sequence numbers. Thanks to all. It was interesting to read that some still do have a use for these. -- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets(r) 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone * john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM
Re: Use of sequence numbering in current HLASM source?
There are some reasons, albeit llittle known, to keep line numbers: 1. With STATS and NUM on, ISPF edit stores the edit session number in 79-80. It's the same as the MM of VV.MM column in the ISPF member list. This information is useful in edit, browse, and compiler/assembly listings. 2. With the default increment, listings (whether printed or on DASD) are still useful even after modest changes. Anything that preserves information and/or promotes productivity is a good thing. On the down-side, the ISPF edit locate (L) command can't be used with the line numbers in messages. So I use an edit macro that I call LL. This is a bare-bones version: /* REXX */ address isredit macro (LinCount) up max down LinCount return 0 Also on the down-side, you loose some potential source code real estate. Unless you are using a 3278-5 (132x27emulation configuration), and have the right ISPF terminal settings, this is no big loss. Most people choose not to scroll left and right to use that area on 80 column emulation. On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 2:15 PM, McKown, John john.mck...@healthmarkets.comwrote: So, in summary, use them or not as the individual or company dictates. I don't really lose any capability by keeping my source as I do, without sequence numbers. Thanks to all. It was interesting to read that some still do have a use for these. -- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets(r) 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone * john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.comhttp://www.healthmarkets.com/ Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM -- OREXXMan
Re: Use of sequence numbering in current HLASM source?
I would prefer the 083 sorter. Nothing made me appreciate computers and mag tape so much as sorting 6 million cards on 12 columns, the first of which was alphanumeric. 18 machines, 5 people, days and yes I would like to be buried face down 9 edge first. :-) IBM Mainframe Assembler List ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU wrote on 11/07/2012 12:06:13 PM: From: McKown, John john.mck...@healthmarkets.com To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU, Date: 11/07/2012 12:19 PM Subject: Re: Use of sequence numbering in current HLASM source? Sent by: IBM Mainframe Assembler List ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU What! You don't have an IBM 088 collator handy? How do you do daily processing? grin/ -- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets(r) 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone * john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company(r), Mid- West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER- l...@listserv.uga.edu] On Behalf Of John Gilmore Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 10:09 AM To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: Re: Use of sequence numbering in current HLASM source? I have not used sequence numbers, CAPS ON, and the like for many years. Those who have sentimental attachments to things of this sort---old habits die hard in some bailiwicks---are and should be free to use them. Specious arguments for their continued use are, of course, easy to construct; but even if I had a source-program deck to drop, I should be hard put to find the piece of unit-record equipment---What was it called?---required to put it back in sequence. --jg - The information contained in this communication (including any attachments hereto) is confidential and is intended solely for the personal and confidential use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, dissemination, copying, or unauthorized use of this information, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message. Thank you
