Re: WTO ABEND D23 help
On 11/2/2010 2:33 PM, Charles Mills wrote: I am not trying to do a one-shot multi-line WTO for the reason you described. What a goofy design! It is perfect for someone with n hard-coded messages but how likely is that in the real world? I don't even know what my n is ahead of time. I am doing n one-line WTO's followed by an E type WTO. Goofy is in the eyes of the beholder. I have a number of STC and batch programs that use fixed ML WTOs to present help text or error responses to incorrect or incomplete modify commands. Gerhard Postpischil Bradford, VT -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: WTO ABEND D23 help
Depending upon the type of WTO, you might have to set R0 = 0. Tony Lubrano Product Author NEON Enterprise Software, LLC. p: 281 207 4922 f: 281 207 4973 tony.lubr...@neon.com What is zPrime? Find out at www.zprime.com or just ask us! -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Charles Mills Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 8:32 AM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: WTO ABEND D23 help I'm trying to do a multi-line WTO, potentially with a CART and a CONSID. (CART and CONSID are zeros in this test, because I am testing in batch.) I have followed *very* closely the example in the Authorized Assembler Services Guide Section 7-12, Assembler example with CMDX control block, multi-line WTO. No matter what I do I get a D23 ABEND on the first WTO. The reason code is 05010008. That is documented as The caller supplied an incorrect parameter list structure. Here are possible reasons: - WPX length was not correct. - WQEBLK parameter was specified with an incorrect WPL. - Zero address was specified for the WPL. There is a field in the WTO MF=L commented as WPX length. It assembles as 104=x'68' and it's still x'68' in the dump. I don't find WQEBLK or WPL in the listing. I've looked at the MF=E macro expansion and it seems to be storing the CART address and the CONSID in the right place in the MF=L. The text pointer is correct (16 bit length + text). What else should I be looking for? Charles Mills -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: WTO ABEND D23 help
Thanks. Did that. No help. As I said, I followed the example very closely. Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Tony Lubrano Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 9:38 AM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: WTO ABEND D23 help Depending upon the type of WTO, you might have to set R0 = 0. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: WTO ABEND D23 help
-Original Message- From: Charles Mills charl...@mcn.org Sent: Nov 2, 2010 9:32 AM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: WTO ABEND D23 help I'm trying to do a multi-line WTO, potentially with a CART and a CONSID. (CART and CONSID are zeros in this test, because I am testing in batch.) I have followed *very* closely the example in the Authorized Assembler Services Guide Section 7-12, Assembler example with CMDX control block, multi-line WTO. No matter what I do I get a D23 ABEND on the first WTO. The reason code is 05010008. That is documented as The caller supplied an incorrect parameter list structure. Here are possible reasons: - WPX length was not correct. - WQEBLK parameter was specified with an incorrect WPL. - Zero address was specified for the WPL. There is a field in the WTO MF=L commented as WPX length. It assembles as 104=x'68' and it's still x'68' in the dump. I don't find WQEBLK or WPL in the listing. I've looked at the MF=E macro expansion and it seems to be storing the CART address and the CONSID in the right place in the MF=L. The text pointer is correct (16 bit length + text). What else should I be looking for? Charles Mills Charles, Just a very simple question. How many lines are you displaying? I remember reading something about having to be APF authorized if there is a large number of lines. Is this possible? Though I could be way of base. Lizette -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: WTO ABEND D23 help
WTO is one of those services that you must prime the parameter list with a model before you use the MF=E form Example : MVC WA_WTO_PLIST,LC_WTO Prime WTO plist with model WTO blah,MF=(E,WA_WTO_PLIST) ... ... *--- * Local constants *--- DS 0F LC_WTO WTO blah,MF=L Model plist in LTORG area l...@wto_lenEQU *-LC_WTOLength of plist ... ... *- *Workarea Storage *- WA DSECT WA_WTO_PLISTDS XL(l...@wto_len) Rob Scott Lead Developer Rocket Software 275 Grove Street * Newton, MA 02466-2272 * USA Tel: +1.617.614.2305 Email: rsc...@rs.com Web: www.rocketsoftware.com -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Charles Mills Sent: 02 November 2010 13:32 To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: WTO ABEND D23 help I'm trying to do a multi-line WTO, potentially with a CART and a CONSID. (CART and CONSID are zeros in this test, because I am testing in batch.) I have followed *very* closely the example in the Authorized Assembler Services Guide Section 7-12, Assembler example with CMDX control block, multi-line WTO. No matter what I do I get a D23 ABEND on the first WTO. The reason code is 05010008. That is documented as The caller supplied an incorrect parameter list structure. Here are possible reasons: - WPX length was not correct. - WQEBLK parameter was specified with an incorrect WPL. - Zero address was specified for the WPL. There is a field in the WTO MF=L commented as WPX length. It assembles as 104=x'68' and it's still x'68' in the dump. I don't find WQEBLK or WPL in the listing. I've looked at the MF=E macro expansion and it seems to be storing the CART address and the CONSID in the right place in the MF=L. The text pointer is correct (16 bit length + text). What else should I be looking for? Charles Mills -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: WTO ABEND D23 help
I believe that you must set R0 to 0 before issuing the MLWTO. Thanks; Ray Baraniecki Morgan Stanley Smith Barney 1 New York Plaza - 18th Floor New York, NY 10004 Telephone: 212-276-5641 Cell: 917-597-5692 -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Lizette Koehler Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 9:51 AM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: WTO ABEND D23 help -Original Message- From: Charles Mills charl...@mcn.org Sent: Nov 2, 2010 9:32 AM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: WTO ABEND D23 help I'm trying to do a multi-line WTO, potentially with a CART and a CONSID. (CART and CONSID are zeros in this test, because I am testing in batch.) I have followed *very* closely the example in the Authorized Assembler Services Guide Section 7-12, Assembler example with CMDX control block, multi-line WTO. No matter what I do I get a D23 ABEND on the first WTO. The reason code is 05010008. That is documented as The caller supplied an incorrect parameter list structure. Here are possible reasons: - WPX length was not correct. - WQEBLK parameter was specified with an incorrect WPL. - Zero address was specified for the WPL. There is a field in the WTO MF=L commented as WPX length. It assembles as 104=x'68' and it's still x'68' in the dump. I don't find WQEBLK or WPL in the listing. I've looked at the MF=E macro expansion and it seems to be storing the CART address and the CONSID in the right place in the MF=L. The text pointer is correct (16 bit length + text). What else should I be looking for? Charles Mills Charles, Just a very simple question. How many lines are you displaying? I remember reading something about having to be APF authorized if there is a large number of lines. Is this possible? Though I could be way of base. Lizette -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- Important Notice to Recipients: The sender of this e-mail is an employee of Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC. If you have received this communication in error, please destroy all electronic and paper copies and notify the sender immediately. Erroneous transmission is not intended to waive confidentiality or privilege. Morgan Stanley Smith Barney reserves the right, to the extent permitted under applicable law, to monitor electronic communications. This message is subject to terms available at the following link: http://www.morganstanley.com/disclaimers/mssbemail.html. If you cannot access this link, please notify us by reply message and we will send the contents to you. By messaging with Morgan Stanley Smith Barney you consent to the foregoing. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: WTO ABEND D23 help
Thanks all. Not sure what did it but it's working now. Just kept tweaking stuff. Gosh, WTO is sensitive and convoluted. BTW, yes, I was initializing the MF=L area and yes, you have to be authorized to use CONNECT (also there are line number limits, but I am not hitting them). Charles -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: WTO ABEND D23 help
At 09:32 -0400 on 11/02/2010, Charles Mills wrote about WTO ABEND D23 help: There is a field in the WTO MF=L commented as WPX length. It assembles as 104=x'68' and it's still x'68' in the dump. I don't find WQEBLK or WPL in the listing. I've looked at the MF=E macro expansion and it seems to be storing the CART address and the CONSID in the right place in the MF=L. The text pointer is correct (16 bit length + text). What else should I be looking for? I see that after tweaking you got it working. One tip for the future. If you are going to use parms like CART and CONSID in the MF=E, they should also be used in the MF=L. Some parm lists have flags set in the MF=L indicating what parms are being supplied. If you fill them in via MF=E, there can be problems if those parms (and thus the flags) are not also in the MF=L. I am not saying that that this was your problem but it does not hurt to make sure by having the parm in both macros (if not needed, it will not cause any problems for macros where the MF=L just provides the parm area but no content and the MF=E does ALL the work of building the parms). -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: WTO ABEND D23 help
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Robert A. Rosenberg hal9...@panix.comwrote: At 09:32 -0400 on 11/02/2010, Charles Mills wrote about WTO ABEND D23 help: There is a field in the WTO MF=L commented as WPX length. It assembles as 104=x'68' and it's still x'68' in the dump. I don't find WQEBLK or WPL in the listing. I've looked at the MF=E macro expansion and it seems to be storing the CART address and the CONSID in the right place in the MF=L. The text pointer is correct (16 bit length + text). What else should I be looking for? I see that after tweaking you got it working. One tip for the future. If you are going to use parms like CART and CONSID in the MF=E, they should also be used in the MF=L. Some parm lists have flags set in the MF=L indicating what parms are being supplied. If you fill them in via MF=E, there can be problems if those parms (and thus the flags) are not also in the MF=L. I am not saying that that this was your problem but it does not hurt to make sure by having the parm in both macros (if not needed, it will not cause any problems for macros where the MF=L just provides the parm area but no content and the MF=E does ALL the work of building the parms). that's true. It is best to use as close to identical MF=E and MF=L expansions as possible. That can be a bit tricky if you don't know ahead of time how many message lines you're going to need. The limit for a non-privileged caller is 10 btw. I also feel honor bound to point out that the IEZWPL mapping is (to be charitable) extremely misleading. If you're going to build your own expansion you will need to study the actual WTO macro expansion rather than relying on IEZWPL. Try WTO TEXT=(...) with one, then two and then three message lines and you will fairly quickly get the gist of it. -- This email might be from the artist formerly known as CC (or not) You be the judge. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: WTO ABEND D23 help
Thanks. Yes. Agree with all of your points. I am using identical (in so far as the macro allows!) parms on both the E and the L macros (per the example I referenced). I am not trying to do a one-shot multi-line WTO for the reason you described. What a goofy design! It is perfect for someone with n hard-coded messages but how likely is that in the real world? I don't even know what my n is ahead of time. I am doing n one-line WTO's followed by an E type WTO. Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Chris Craddock Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 12:52 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: WTO ABEND D23 help I see that after tweaking you got it working. One tip for the future. If you are going to use parms like CART and CONSID in the MF=E, they should also be used in the MF=L. Some parm lists have flags set in the MF=L indicating what parms are being supplied. If you fill them in via MF=E, there can be problems if those parms (and thus the flags) are not also in the MF=L. I am not saying that that this was your problem but it does not hurt to make sure by having the parm in both macros (if not needed, it will not cause any problems for macros where the MF=L just provides the parm area but no content and the MF=E does ALL the work of building the parms). that's true. It is best to use as close to identical MF=E and MF=L expansions as possible. That can be a bit tricky if you don't know ahead of time how many message lines you're going to need. The limit for a non-privileged caller is 10 btw. I also feel honor bound to point out that the IEZWPL mapping is (to be charitable) extremely misleading. If you're going to build your own expansion you will need to study the actual WTO macro expansion rather than relying on IEZWPL. Try WTO TEXT=(...) with one, then two and then three message lines and you will fairly quickly get the gist of it. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
