SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING...
> -Ursprungligt meddelande- > Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För McKown, John > Skickat: den 7 november 2007 14:57 > Till: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > Ämne: Re: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING... > > > -Original Message- > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Thomas Berg > > Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 4:09 AM > > To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > > Subject: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING... > > Importance: High > > > > > > ..just for my obscene curiosity: > > > > What IDIOT designed the COBOL COPY REPLACING statement ?? > > > > Thomas > > ANSI - a committee: A creature with multiple stomachs, but no brain. > The latter I have no difficulty to believe ! We (a local project) had an urgent need to use this functionality and as I hadn't any experience with COPY REPLACING I thought it was a no-brainer... As I discovered that You have to had a prepared copy to replace a non-space delimited string I thought that, OK, I solve this with nested COPYs... ...BUT NESTED COPYS IS NOT ALLOWED WITH REPLACING ! Essentially, when You REALLY need this functionality You CANNOT USE IT ! Sometimes I feel s tired... Thomas -- 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
SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING...
> -Ursprungligt meddelande- > Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För Thompson, Steve > Skickat: den 7 november 2007 16:43 > Till: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > Ämne: Re: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING... > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Thomas Berg > Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 4:09 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > Subject: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING... > > ..just for my obscene curiosity: > > What IDIOT designed the COBOL COPY REPLACING statement ?? > > > The committee that was attempting to provide macro type processing for > COBOL. Or perhaps you would like to call it quasi-dynamic COPY Member > updating specific to the program currently being compiled. > > Regards, > Steve Thompson > > Ps. No, I didn't say I used it. But I've seen it used and well, I'd > rather do macro preprocessing (a la CICS). I would have expected the level of functionality offered by the REPLACING option of something made by a first-year programmer... (We had until some Years ago a preprocessor that made replacing of strings in copys VERY trivial.) Thomas _ Thomas Berg Specialist IT Utveckling Swedbank AB (Publ) -- 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
SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING...
If You have an example of a "work-around" for the partial word replacement
I would be grateful for that. Note that a change in existing copys is not an
option.
(If that would change the field names or other functional changes.)
You cannot use nested COPY statements with COPY REPLACING. (IBM)
Thomas
_
Thomas Berg Specialist IT Utveckling Swedbank AB (Publ)
> -Ursprungligt meddelande-
> Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För Bill Klein
> Skickat: den 8 november 2007 04:25
> Till: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Ämne: Fw: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING...
>
> I assume (but could be mistaken) that you are trying to
> replace a "part of a
> string" rather than a COBOL "text word". Besides the fact
> that there are
> "work-arounds" for doing partial word replacement, you might
> be interested
> that the current ('02) standard DOES allow for replacing a
> "leading" or
> "trailing" part of a COBOL text word (but not the middle).
> If you want this
> feature sooner than later (in IBM COBOL) you may want to
> submit a marketing
> REQUEST to IBM referencing the existing SHARE requirement for
> this facility.
>
> I know that COPY REPLACING was in the '68 Standard - I don't know when
> exactly it was "designed".
>
> P.S. If you want to use "replacing" functionality with
> nested copies, look
> at using the REPLACE statement along with nested COPY
> statements. I believe
> (but haven't checked it) that IBM support this already.
>
> P.S. I do NOT claim that the COBOL copy/replacing facility
> is how I would
> design such a facility today - but it has been used
> "successfully" for 40
> years or so.
>
> "Thomas Berg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> pa.myntet.se>.
> ..
> > ..just for my obscene curiosity:
> >
> > What IDIOT designed the COBOL COPY REPLACING statement ??
> >
> > Thomas
>
> --
> 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
>
--
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
SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING...
Interesting. I wasn't aware of the REPLACE statements existence. Maybe I should read the manual more often :) Unfortunately it has all of the COPY REPLACING's limitations. (Except about "stacked" COPY's.) Thomas _ Thomas Berg Specialist IT Utveckling Swedbank AB (Publ) > -Ursprungligt meddelande- > Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För Bill Klein > Skickat: den 9 november 2007 05:15 > Till: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > Ämne: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING... > > The documented (and functional) way to do partial replacement > in current > COBOL is documented at: > > http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/igy > 3lr31/8.1.7.3 > > Int the part starting, >"The COPY statement with REPLACING phrase can be used to > replace parts of > words." > > However, a better "example" is later at the page in the > section labeled > Example 3 > > NOTE WELL: > If/when you use this, the COPY member may NOT be used without the > REPLACING option, so you can only use this technique for > structures that are > ALWAYS replaced. > >*** > > As I said in my original note, for those wanting to "combine" COPY > processing and REPLACING processing - with nested COPY's, the > thing to do is > to use the >REPLACE statement > which can be coded in either the "main" source (before the > COPY statement - > or within any nested COPY member. You should use the REPLACE > OFF variation > AFTER the "main" COPY statement to turn it off. > >*** > > P.S. BOTH the ":TAG:" approach to partial word replacement and using > REPLACE with nested COPY's are portable to any Standard > conforming COBOL > compiler. -- 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
SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING...
> -Ursprungligt meddelande- > Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För Ed Gould > Skickat: den 12 november 2007 20:41 > Till: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > Ämne: Re: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING... > > On Nov 12, 2007, at 1:24 PM, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote: > > > > > I want to be able to use REPLACING for such a copybook WITHOUT > > modifying the copybook (because I don't own it and am not allowed to change > > it). > > > > Why can't we do such a simple thing? > > > > Peter > > Peter, > > There are usually ways around this one is to copy the member to a > different library and change and then when you compile just add the > library in front of the concatenation. As to why... ask the > dark side:) > > Ed The ground problem with COPY's is that they often have the requirement of standards and "one source at one place". And if You - when You have a big organisation and want consistency in developement - are using meta database products as Datamanager etc, You definitely don't have the option of changing the COPY ! The whole point of using an option like COPY REPLACE is to make temporary/local changes of a permanent source. Which means it should be versatile and flexible. Doing a rigid and limited solution for the need is to missing the point completely. Thomas _ Thomas Berg Specialist IT Utveckling Swedbank AB (Publ) -- 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
SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING...
That was clever! (Didn't saw Your previous post.) Will try and check if we could use this solution. (There will be minimal problems with the owner if we can "guarantee" that this will not cause them any problems. Which it looks like.) Thanks!! Thomas _ Thomas Berg Specialist IT Utveckling Swedbank AB (Publ) > -Ursprungligt meddelande- > Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För Bill Klein > Skickat: den 14 november 2007 23:20 > Till: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > Ämne: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING... > > Thomas, > I posted this already, but in case it didn't make it to you (or > others) > > There *IS* a method of insuring that old programs will > compile cleanly and > that new programs can use partial word replacement with ":TAG:". This > method does allow the original "owner" to still own the COPY > member. No > testing should be required - but certainly can be. Changes > in the middle of > the night will still compile. > > If you have a current copymember called "ABC" with the following code: > >01 Group1. >05 WS-Field1 Pic X. >05 WS-Field2 Pic 9. > > You want programs that use "COPY ABC." to continue to work > "as is" but you > want to be able to change "WS-" in some cases. > > Replace the member ABC with the following code: > > Replace ==:TAG:== By ==WS-==. > Copy ABCX. > Replace off. > > Then create a new member called ABCX with the following code: > >01 Group1. >05 :TAG:Field1 Pic X. >05 :TAG:Field2 Pic 9. > > *** > > All existing programs will continue to work without modification. > > New programs (or changes to existing programs that want partial word > replacement) can use: > > Copy ABCX >Replacing ==:TAG:== by ==New-Prefix-==. > > * * * > > Yes, this requires the "cooperation" of the owner of original > member "ABC" - > but it should be a minimal change and will not impact any existing > functional programs. > > "Thomas Berg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED] > pa.myntet.se>. > .. > > > -Ursprungligt meddelande- > > > Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För Howard Brazee > > > Skickat: den 14 november 2007 17:34 > > > Till: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > > > Ämne: Re: SV: SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING... > > > > > > On 13 Nov 2007 10:33:54 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas > Berg) wrote: > > > > > > >> How many copy members have you created designed for > the REPLACING > > > >> option? > > > > > > > >None. (The "new" COPY's must be backwards compatible with > > > old programs.) > > > > > > Old programs don't use new COPY statements unless they > are modified to > > > do so. > > > > > > But future programs will. > > > > > > > Old programs that are recompiled get the "new" copys/versions. > > And fails in compilation if they contains the ":tag:" format > > (if they - as I mentioned - are not using REPLACING). > > And that is not acceptable. > > > > Thomas > > -- > 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 > -- 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: SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING...
On Nov 12, 2007, at 2:08 PM, Thomas Berg wrote: ---SNIP--- Peter, There are usually ways around this one is to copy the member to a different library and change and then when you compile just add the library in front of the concatenation. As to why... ask the dark side:) Ed The ground problem with COPY's is that they often have the requirement of standards and "one source at one place". And if You - when You have a big organisation and want consistency in developement - are using meta database products as Datamanager etc, You definitely don't have the option of changing the COPY ! The whole point of using an option like COPY REPLACE is to make temporary/local changes of a permanent source. Which means it should be versatile and flexible. Doing a rigid and limited solution for the need is to missing the point completely. Thomas, I know (and you realize this as well) that what I suggested is a play around to see if the work around worked as advertised. If it does work then go through change control (like everyone else). 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
SV: SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING...
> -Ursprungligt meddelande- > Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För Ed Gould > Skickat: den 12 november 2007 22:19 > Till: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > Ämne: Re: SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING... > > > > > The ground problem with COPY's is that they often have the > requirement > > of standards and "one source at one place". And if You - when You > > have > > a big organisation and want consistency in developement - are using > > meta database products as Datamanager etc, You definitely don't have > > the option of changing the COPY ! > > > > The whole point of using an option like COPY REPLACE is to make > > temporary/local changes of a permanent source. Which means > it should > > be versatile and flexible. Doing a rigid and limited solution for > > the need is to missing the point completely. > > > > Thomas, I know (and you realize this as well) that what I suggested > is a play around to see if the work around worked as advertised. If > it does work then go through change control (like everyone else). > > Ed > Hm. I think there is some missunderstanding here. If it's from Your or my side I'm not sure. But AFAICS there is no possibility of change of either the original COPY or *what* COPY we could use in our programs. (It's only the owner of the copy that can/are allowed to do the change, and it is not in his interest (rightfully so) to do a change in the way we need. But it is certainly in both our (the local project) interest and the interest in our organisation as a whole that we have the possibility to use the original COPY with a temporary change in our programs. It could be of interest to note that the programs we are talking about is output from a source code conversion project. And that the availability of the applications in case is *VERY* important. That means that any disturbance of the production is very unkindly looked upon... Unfortunately I don't think it's proper of me to go into deeper detail. Thomas _ Thomas Berg Specialist IT Utveckling Swedbank AB (Publ) -- 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: SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING...
On Wed, 7 Nov 2007 17:20:36 +0100, Thomas Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Essentially, when You REALLY need this functionality You CANNOT USE IT ! > >Sometimes I feel s tired... > I do not know exactly what you need to do, but one possible solution - assuming an 01 data name with several 05, 10, etc.. - is to REPLACE the entire 01 data name and then use the OF clause to qualify every field access. YMMV of course. > >-- >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 -- 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: SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING...
> -Original Message- > From: Paul Peplinski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 2:49 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING... > I do not know exactly what you need to do, but one possible solution - > assuming an 01 data name with several 05, 10, etc.. - is to REPLACE the > entire 01 data name and then use the OF clause to qualify every field > access. Yes, that is always an alternative. For frequently-used fields though it can be the proverbial PITA to have to change everything in the program to use the "OF 01-level-name" format. Possible but painful, and frequently ugly. > YMMV of course. Indeed. Depends quite heavily on the level of PITA involved as well. Peter 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. -- 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: SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING...
-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Peplinski Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 1:49 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING... On Wed, 7 Nov 2007 17:20:36 +0100, Thomas Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I do not know exactly what you need to do, but one possible solution - assuming an 01 data name with several 05, 10, etc.. - is to REPLACE the entire 01 data name and then use the OF clause to qualify every field access. Along those lines, I have created a second COPY that I have used against an 01 with REDEFINES. And that makes life a little easier. And when I got really energetic, I wrote a small program to build the new COPY based on reading the original COPY (but then, I was doing VSE to MVS migrations at the time). Regards, Steve Thompson -- 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: SV: SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING...
On 12 Nov 2007 13:48:31 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Berg) wrote: >Hm. I think there is some missunderstanding here. If it's from Your >or my side I'm not sure. But AFAICS there is no possibility of change >of either the original COPY or *what* COPY we could use in our programs. >(It's only the owner of the copy that can/are allowed to do the change, >and it is not in his interest (rightfully so) to do a change in the way >we need. I think we all understand this. But we are saying that the nature of the CoBOL copy statement (at least the version that I have) is that unless the copy library was designed with foresight, you're SOL. How many copy members have you created designed for the REPLACING option? -- 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: SV: SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING...
== Howard Brazee == wrote2007-11-13 17:07: On 12 Nov 2007 13:48:31 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Berg) wrote: Hm. I think there is some missunderstanding here. If it's from Your or my side I'm not sure. But AFAICS there is no possibility of change of either the original COPY or *what* COPY we could use in our programs. (It's only the owner of the copy that can/are allowed to do the change, and it is not in his interest (rightfully so) to do a change in the way we need. I think we all understand this. But we are saying that the nature of the CoBOL copy statement (at least the version that I have) is that unless the copy library was designed with foresight, you're SOL. I understand that. How many copy members have you created designed for the REPLACING option? None. (The "new" COPY's must be backwards compatible with old programs.) Thomas Berg -- 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: SV: SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING...
On 13 Nov 2007 10:33:54 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Berg) wrote: >> How many copy members have you created designed for the REPLACING >> option? > >None. (The "new" COPY's must be backwards compatible with old programs.) Old programs don't use new COPY statements unless they are modified to do so. But future programs will. -- 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
SV: SV: SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING...
> -Ursprungligt meddelande- > Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För Howard Brazee > Skickat: den 14 november 2007 17:34 > Till: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > Ämne: Re: SV: SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING... > > On 13 Nov 2007 10:33:54 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Berg) wrote: > > >> How many copy members have you created designed for the REPLACING > >> option? > > > >None. (The "new" COPY's must be backwards compatible with > old programs.) > > Old programs don't use new COPY statements unless they are modified to > do so. > > But future programs will. > Old programs that are recompiled get the "new" copys/versions. And fails in compilation if they contains the ":tag:" format (if they - as I mentioned - are not using REPLACING). And that is not acceptable. Thomas _ Thomas Berg Specialist IT Utveckling Swedbank AB (Publ) -- 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: SV: SV: SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING...
Thomas Berg wrote:
-Ursprungligt meddelande-
Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För Howard Brazee
Skickat: den 14 november 2007 17:34
Till: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Ämne: Re: SV: SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING...
On 13 Nov 2007 10:33:54 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Berg) wrote:
How many copy members have you created designed for the REPLACING
option?
None. (The "new" COPY's must be backwards compatible with
old programs.)
Old programs don't use new COPY statements unless they are modified to
do so.
But future programs will.
Old programs that are recompiled get the "new" copys/versions.
And fails in compilation if they contains the ":tag:" format
(if they - as I mentioned - are not using REPLACING).
And that is not acceptable.
Thomas
You keep saying that ("that is not acceptable"), and I keep
wondering: why not? Sometimes things must change. IBM has
done a pretty amazing job in supporting old code with no
changes; code that was written and linked over 30 years
ago will likely still run today with out being re-compiled
and re-bound. Try that on Windows or UNIX.
But if you want to use new features, you likely need to
re-write, re-compile, re-bind. With some careful planning
you can produce code that will run without more modification
(unless you want to use more new features) for 30+ more
years.
But nothing is free. I thought Bill Klein's suggestion was
pretty clever and workable. But obviously we are not seeing
the line between "acceptable" and "not acceptable" in the
same way your user is.
Kind regards,
-Steve Comstock
The Trainer's Friend, Inc.
303-393-8716
http://www.trainersfriend.com
z/OS Application development made easier
* Our classes include
+ How things work
+ Programming examples with realistic applications
+ Starter / skeleton code
+ Complete working programs
+ Useful utilities and subroutines
+ Tips and techniques
--
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: SV: SV: SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING...
On 14 Nov 2007 08:42:26 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Berg) wrote: >> Old programs don't use new COPY statements unless they are modified to >> do so. >> >> But future programs will. >> > >Old programs that are recompiled get the "new" copys/versions. >And fails in compilation if they contains the ":tag:" format >(if they - as I mentioned - are not using REPLACING). >And that is not acceptable. That's not my definition of a new copy member. That's my definition of a modified copy member. When I write new copy members, I design them with REPLACING in mind. -- 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
SV: SV: SV: SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING...
> -Ursprungligt meddelande-
> Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För Steve Comstock
> Skickat: den 14 november 2007 17:47
> Till: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Ämne: Re: SV: SV: SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING...
>
> Thomas Berg wrote:
> >>-Ursprungligt meddelande-
> >>Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> >>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För Howard Brazee
> >>Skickat: den 14 november 2007 17:34
> >>Till: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> >>Ämne: Re: SV: SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING...
...
> >
> > Old programs that are recompiled get the "new" copys/versions.
> > And fails in compilation if they contains the ":tag:" format
> > (if they - as I mentioned - are not using REPLACING).
> > And that is not acceptable.
> >
> > Thomas
>
> You keep saying that ("that is not acceptable"), and I keep
> wondering: why not? Sometimes things must change. IBM has
> done a pretty amazing job in supporting old code with no
> changes; code that was written and linked over 30 years
> ago will likely still run today with out being re-compiled
> and re-bound. Try that on Windows or UNIX.
>
> But if you want to use new features, you likely need to
> re-write, re-compile, re-bind. With some careful planning
> you can produce code that will run without more modification
> (unless you want to use more new features) for 30+ more
> years.
>
> But nothing is free. I thought Bill Klein's suggestion was
> pretty clever and workable. But obviously we are not seeing
> the line between "acceptable" and "not acceptable" in the
> same way your user is.
We (the project) can't force other parts of the organization
(that is not part of the project) to do work that for which
they have no budget. (That is: change, compile, *test* and
update the production.)
And if a programmer is called in in the middle of the night
to fix a production problem and is seriously delayed by the
compilation error we will be hanged by the CIO or CEO.
(Again, the availability of the production applications goes
before *anything*.)
The problem we tried to solve was that we have to either
make the "new" copys conforming to our current standard
that is needed for (among other things) to work with
Datamanager *OR* make them compatible with the old programs.
(We had a preprocessor - MetaCOBOL - earlier that have a
COPY REPLACING functionality that would have solved our
problem.)
My initial point when I started this thread was that if
You make an effort to create a functionality, why doing
it badly ?
Thomas
_
Thomas Berg Specialist IT Utveckling Swedbank AB (Publ)
--
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
SV: SV: SV: SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING...
> -Ursprungligt meddelande- > Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För Howard Brazee > Skickat: den 14 november 2007 18:35 > Till: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > Ämne: Re: SV: SV: SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING... > > On 14 Nov 2007 08:42:26 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Berg) > wrote: > > >> Old programs don't use new COPY statements unless they are > modified to > >> do so. > >> > >> But future programs will. > >> > > > >Old programs that are recompiled get the "new" copys/versions. > >And fails in compilation if they contains the ":tag:" format > >(if they - as I mentioned - are not using REPLACING). > >And that is not acceptable. > > That's not my definition of a new copy member. That's my definition > of a modified copy member. > > When I write new copy members, I design them with REPLACING in mind. Well, yes, "modified" is the correct term. My bad. Since the start of this thread I have shortened the wording (in reality there is both new and modified COPYs due to our use of "stacked" COPY statements). Thomas _ Thomas Berg Specialist IT Utveckling Swedbank AB (Publ) -- 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
