Re: COBOL Compiler Help
-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Joe Zitzelberger [ snip ] Anyone that writes a 309k line module should be dipped in honey and strung up over an ant hill next to the person at Micro$oft that invented that damn paper-clip. Wasn't that Microsoft Bob? I hear he's the star of the Enzyte commercials now. :-D -jc- -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: COBOL Compiler Help
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 09/22/2005 at 07:18 AM, Chase, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Wasn't that Microsoft Bob? Microsoft Bob is now Mrs. William Gates. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: COBOL Compiler Help
What else can it tweak to get this to compile? Is the program just TOO large? ... Fire the programmer! (Maybe a bit too harsh?) Hasn't anybody heard of MODULAR? -teD In God we Trust! All others bring data! -- W. Edwards Deming -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: COBOL Compiler Help
On Sep 20, 2005, at 7:00 PM, Ted MacNEIL wrote: What else can it tweak to get this to compile? Is the program just TOO large? ... Fire the programmer! (Maybe a bit too harsh?) Hasn't anybody heard of MODULAR? -teD Ted, Well that may be a partial solution but over the years.. I have seen cobol translators (convert from UNIVAC to IBM example) produce LARGE cobol source. So half way defending the programmer (in this instance) it may not be his/her fault. Going back 20 some years I have seen some HUGE cobol programs. This was at a company that totally bought into modular programming. I have also seen hired guns brought in to break up large programs sometimes they were able to do it sometimes they finally surfaced with a suggestion to break it up into several programs. I have also seen after a few years the program grow back into a large program. Apparently there is life after death for cobol programs. Maybe it was pregnant ?? Ed -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: COBOL Compiler Help
On Sep 21, 2005, at 12:00 AM, Ted MacNEIL wrote: What else can it tweak to get this to compile? Is the program just TOO large? ... Fire the programmer! (Maybe a bit too harsh?) Hasn't anybody heard of MODULAR? -teD At the risk of getting things thrown at me... this program might explain some of the reluctance to hire 30-year veterans of programming from the neighboring thread. There are a number of old-timers whose formal training consist of the Call verb is Evil! and Michael Jackson says goto is cool!. I'm not saying all, or even a majority, of old-timers would write such a thing, but no PFCSK with an ounce of training would write such crap. Your chances of avoiding monolithic garbage like this are better the younger the programmer. And I would say firing is not harsh enough. Anyone that writes a 309k line module should be dipped in honey and strung up over an ant hill next to the person at Micro$oft that invented that damn paper-clip. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: COBOL Compiler Help
At 11:09 PM 9/21/2005, you wrote: On Sep 21, 2005, at 12:00 AM, Ted MacNEIL wrote: What else can it tweak to get this to compile? Is the program just TOO large? ... Fire the programmer! (Maybe a bit too harsh?) Hasn't anybody heard of MODULAR? -teD At the risk of getting things thrown at me... this program might explain some of the reluctance to hire 30-year veterans of programming from the neighboring thread. There are a number of old-timers whose formal training consist of the Call verb is Evil! and Michael Jackson says goto is cool!. I'm not saying all, or even a majority, of old-timers would write such a thing, but no PFCSK with an ounce of training would write such crap. Your chances of avoiding monolithic garbage like this are better the younger the programmer. And I would say firing is not harsh enough. Anyone that writes a 309k line module should be dipped in honey and strung up over an ant hill next to the person at Micro$oft that invented that damn paper-clip. That's all well and good. But I remember working on large programs, that in addition to being too large called 'black boxes' used in a vaguely remembered conversion that had long ago been completed. Everybody agreed they were too large, spaghetti coded, inefficient, etc. At the same time every change was accompanied by the mantra that 'there was no time to fix it, that would be done at a later date. Just go ahead and add the enhancements and let the program grow. On the flip side, I've worked with younger programmers who when asked to rate a change effort as small, medium or large stated it was large since it would take a whole day. Small was an hour or two and medium anything in between. Comes from their drag n drop programmer training. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.3/107 - Release Date: 9/20/2005 -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: COBOL Compiler Help
-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alan C. Field Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 12:48 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: COBOL Compiler Help I have a user who has a COBOL program that is HUGE and we can't get it to compile. We've altered the SIZE from MAX down to 8192K and have set the compiler region to 64M. If we get SIZE too low (like 8192K) the compile fails with a message suggesting we increase it. What else can it tweak to get this to compile? Is the program just TOO large? Appreciate any suggestions. Here are the numbers: SOURCE RECORDS = 381834 DATA DIVISION STATEMENTS = 19695 PROCEDURE DIVISION STATEMENTS = 93539 Thanks, Alan Uh, what are the symptoms? The compiler abends? The compiler puts out some message? I don't know what the program does, but it might make sense to try to do some functional decomposition on it to break it into smaller chunks (subroutines). Then create a main routine which simply calls those subroutines. -- John McKown Senior Systems Programmer UICI Insurance Center Information Technology This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and its' content is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this transmission, or taking any action based on it, is strictly prohibited. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: COBOL Compiler Help
This compiler: PP 5655-G53 IBM ENTERPRISE COBOL FOR Z/OS 3.3.1 Various abends, but primarily 878, 80A, FETCH faliures depending on various SIZE and REGION combinations. Seems to me a program that big should be rewritten but I'm probably not going to win that battle till I can show there is no way to compile it as it is now. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: COBOL Compiler Help
Allan, Last time this happened to me, the only way I could get program to compile was to turn OPTIMIZE off. Allan wrote: I have a user who has a COBOL program that is HUGE and we can't get it to compile. We've altered the SIZE from MAX down to 8192K and have set the compiler region to 64M. If we get SIZE too low (like 8192K) the compile fails with a message suggesting we increase it. What else can it tweak to get this to compile? Is the program just TOO large? Appreciate any suggestions. Here are the numbers: SOURCE RECORDS = 381834 DATA DIVISION STATEMENTS = 19695 PROCEDURE DIVISION STATEMENTS = 93539 Thanks, Alan Tom Savor Certegy Card Services 11720 Amber Park Drive, Suite 500 Alpharetta, GA 30004 Phone: 404-495-3716 cell: 404-660-6898 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] /\/\_00_/\/\ -- This message contains information from Certegy, Inc which may be confidential and privileged. If you are not an intended recipient, please refrain from any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this information and note that such actions are prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify by e:mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] == -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: COBOL Compiler Help
Alan C. Field wrote: This compiler: PP 5655-G53 IBM ENTERPRISE COBOL FOR Z/OS 3.3.1 Various abends, but primarily 878, 80A, FETCH faliures depending on various SIZE and REGION combinations. Seems to me a program that big should be rewritten but I'm probably not going to win that battle till I can show there is no way to compile it as it is now. It might help to make sure compiler options that generate extra work / outputs are turned off. Not sure about all of them, but try and make sure these are specified: NOADATA ARITH(COMPAT) NOAWO BUFSIZE - look at this option; may need to make it smaller so buffers take less total virtual storage; this may make compile run slower, but it may allow it to complete NODECK NODIAGTRUNC NODLL NOEXPORTALL NOLIB - unless you have COPY statments NOLIST NOMAP NONAME NONUMBER NUMPROC(PFD) - but be sure all packed-decimal data is all valid NOOFFSET NOOPTIMIZE NOSEQ SIZE(??) - you have been experimenting with this, I gather Note: To take advantage of large storage, be sure you have a sufficient REGION size for the compile step; if your shop allows it, use REGION=0M NOSOURCE - just to see if it allows you to compile at all NOSQL NOSSRANGE NOTERMINAL NOTEST NOTHREAD TRUNC(OPT) NOVBREF NOWORD NOXREF Many of these are the IBM-supplied defaults, many of them are just stabs in the dark by me; but check the compile listing because it will list the options in effect, and if your shop has a surprising default it may impact your compile. If you get it to compile successfully, then go back and add in or change the options you want or need. Hope this helps. Kind regards, -Steve Comstock -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: COBOL Compiler Help
Thanks for the suggestions - Fiddled with the size some more, reduced BUFSIZE and made the BLKSIZE smaller on the SYSIN and SYSPRINT datasets. FInally got a complete compile. Alan Alan C. Field [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU 09/20/2005 12:48 Please respond to IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU To IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU cc Subject COBOL Compiler Help I have a user who has a COBOL program that is HUGE and we can't get it to compile. We've altered the SIZE from MAX down to 8192K and have set the compiler region to 64M. If we get SIZE too low (like 8192K) the compile fails with a message suggesting we increase it. What else can it tweak to get this to compile? Is the program just TOO large? Appreciate any suggestions. Here are the numbers: SOURCE RECORDS = 381834 DATA DIVISION STATEMENTS = 19695 PROCEDURE DIVISION STATEMENTS = 93539 Thanks, Alan -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: COBOL Compiler Help
How about REGION=0M and no IEFUSI limit. You may also try NOOPTIMZE for such a huge program. Roland -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alan C. Field Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 7:57 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: COBOL Compiler Help This compiler: PP 5655-G53 IBM ENTERPRISE COBOL FOR Z/OS 3.3.1 Various abends, but primarily 878, 80A, FETCH faliures depending on various SIZE and REGION combinations. Seems to me a program that big should be rewritten but I'm probably not going to win that battle till I can show there is no way to compile it as it is now. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
