Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
ISPF regexn are fairly basic, and evn with a PCRE level you wouldn't br able to
do things like these
CHANGE 73/80 TO X10+10 IN EVERY 3RD LINE OF 'ABC' 1/3 in 1.5-2/3.7+2
COPY 'BAL' 10/15 TO END
CHANGE 73/80 TO '' IN EVERY 3RD LINE START 2 OF 'BAL' 10/15
CHANGE '(' DIGITS*3 ')' TO SUBSTRING 2/4
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Leonard D Woren
Sent: Friday, September 8, 2023 7:42 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
Seymour J Metz wrote on 9/8/2023 5:29 AM:
> I used SuperWylbur, but even in the free version you had associative ranges,
> which greatly simplified many editing tasks.
Doesn't current ISPF's regexp support let you do the same thing? Not
that I've learned yet how to do that stuff...
Even before regexps, you could always use the ISPF hack "X ALL", "F
ALL string", "C ALL NX oldstr newstr". Which is probably why I
haven't gotten around to learning regexps.
/Leonard
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
On Fri, Sep 08, 2023 at 04:35:59PM -0700, Leonard D Woren wrote: You left out URSA at UCLA. Online editing as long as the file was RECFM FB/80/400. Pre 3270, 20 lines of 40 characters. Along with job submission and output view capability. > Just like the rest that I listed. So a failure, instead of taking out 1 TSO > user, takes out hundreds of users. URSA was reasonably stable once a few things were fixed. There was the problem of the total system & hardware (360/91) failure to deal with but separate address spaces wouldn't help with that (really seperate regions, this was MVT and before and after 1970). Just don't edit "NULLFILE" (keypunch used EXCP). -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
This list is dying just like assembler. Another 5, maybe 10 years, both will be in the dustbin of history. In 10 years, most of the dominant posters will be gone. Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Friday, September 8, 2023, 7:44 PM, Tom Brennan wrote: I'd say head them over to https://www.facebook.com/groups/ProfessionalMainframers In spite of the name, it's 90% nostalgia - maybe more. And there are a lot of retired folks there to give upvotes and comments - unlike a new email group. For me, I don't mind anything reasonably on-topic. It's the political, know-it-all, truck speed limits, I-won-a-game-show type of posts that are driving people away. Tom's opinion. On 9/8/2023 2:17 PM, Mark Zelden wrote: > I'm with most of the posters... > > There needs to be an IBM-MAIN-NOSTALGIA list and these trips down memory lane > moved there when they start. > > I was pretty much gone from IBM-MAIN over the last 2-3 years due to just > being too busy > to try and keep up but recently have tried to start following again. The > signal to noise ratio > is near unbearable and much worse now. The bickering like children is > unprofessional. > > I follow from the web archives instead of email, but I guess to get any value > out of this > list and contribute when I can I'm going to have to seriously consider moving > to email and > filtering out the noise and certain posters like some others have done. Too > bad that > some people are being driven away completely. > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
I'd say head them over to https://www.facebook.com/groups/ProfessionalMainframers In spite of the name, it's 90% nostalgia - maybe more. And there are a lot of retired folks there to give upvotes and comments - unlike a new email group. For me, I don't mind anything reasonably on-topic. It's the political, know-it-all, truck speed limits, I-won-a-game-show type of posts that are driving people away. Tom's opinion. On 9/8/2023 2:17 PM, Mark Zelden wrote: I'm with most of the posters... There needs to be an IBM-MAIN-NOSTALGIA list and these trips down memory lane moved there when they start. I was pretty much gone from IBM-MAIN over the last 2-3 years due to just being too busy to try and keep up but recently have tried to start following again. The signal to noise ratio is near unbearable and much worse now. The bickering like children is unprofessional. I follow from the web archives instead of email, but I guess to get any value out of this list and contribute when I can I'm going to have to seriously consider moving to email and filtering out the noise and certain posters like some others have done. Too bad that some people are being driven away completely. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
Seymour J Metz wrote on 9/8/2023 5:29 AM: I used SuperWylbur, but even in the free version you had associative ranges, which greatly simplified many editing tasks. Doesn't current ISPF's regexp support let you do the same thing? Not that I've learned yet how to do that stuff... Even before regexps, you could always use the ISPF hack "X ALL", "F ALL string", "C ALL NX oldstr newstr". Which is probably why I haven't gotten around to learning regexps. /Leonard -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
Steve Thompson wrote on 9/7/2023 7:24 PM: You ever work with WYLBUR? Yes, at RAND circa 1976 as a guest of an employee, and at Stanford, which is where I quickly grew to hate it. Funny thing is, many of the other Stanford systems people started using TSO more as they saw what I could do with it. Single address space, Just like the rest that I listed. So a failure, instead of taking out 1 TSO user, takes out hundreds of users. Wylbur's ability to recover user's work from its own page files was both a blessing and curse -- users didn't lose more than one screen interaction of work, but it could take a long time for Wylbur to restart as it did that recovery. Had its own scripting language, so applications were written to run inside of Wylbur. Yet another tally mark in the disadvantages column. /Leonard -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
Hercules 390 list often gets many of those conversations. Or trying to recreate the software. On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 4:17 PM Mark Zelden wrote: > > I'm with most of the posters... > > There needs to be an IBM-MAIN-NOSTALGIA list and these trips down memory lane > moved there when they start. > > I was pretty much gone from IBM-MAIN over the last 2-3 years due to just > being too busy > to try and keep up but recently have tried to start following again. The > signal to noise ratio > is near unbearable and much worse now. The bickering like children is > unprofessional. > > I follow from the web archives instead of email, but I guess to get any value > out of this > list and contribute when I can I'm going to have to seriously consider moving > to email and > filtering out the noise and certain posters like some others have done. Too > bad that > some people are being driven away completely. > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
I'm with most of the posters... There needs to be an IBM-MAIN-NOSTALGIA list and these trips down memory lane moved there when they start. I was pretty much gone from IBM-MAIN over the last 2-3 years due to just being too busy to try and keep up but recently have tried to start following again. The signal to noise ratio is near unbearable and much worse now. The bickering like children is unprofessional. I follow from the web archives instead of email, but I guess to get any value out of this list and contribute when I can I'm going to have to seriously consider moving to email and filtering out the noise and certain posters like some others have done. Too bad that some people are being driven away completely. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [EXT] Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
For what it's worth (which is not much, I realize) I generally read this kind of thread with interest and sometimes chime in. Not saying you're wrong, Rex, just casting my own vote the other way. There are lots of threads that don’t interest me, but it's very little work to ignore 'em. --- Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313 /* User error. Replace user and press any key to continue. */ -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Pommier, Rex Sent: Friday, September 8, 2023 09:31 Folks, This is not addressed to anybody in particular, but we really don't need to know of everybody's 30-40 year old experiences with now-defunct text editors. This kind of stuff is for sitting around a SKIDS table at Share (if those still exist) while having a beer, not on this list. Please stop the chatter on this. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Crawford Robert C (Contractor) Sent: Friday, September 8, 2023 7:47 AM I used WYLBUR at Texas A University in the early 80's. It worked well enough for undergraduate programmers although it got very slow towards the end of the semester when everybody was trying to finish their final projects. The EXEC facility was pretty slick. I hated the line editor but didn't know any better. When I got my first real job someone showed me SPF edit and I thought I'd died on gone to heaven. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [EXT] Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
Folks, This is not addressed to anybody in particular, but we really don't need to know of everybody's 30-40 year old experiences with now-defunct text editors. This kind of stuff is for sitting around a SKIDS table at Share (if those still exist) while having a beer, not on this list. Please stop the chatter on this. Rex -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Crawford Robert C (Contractor) Sent: Friday, September 8, 2023 7:47 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [EXT] Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days I used WYLBUR at Texas A University in the early 80's. It worked well enough for undergraduate programmers although it got very slow towards the end of the semester when everybody was trying to finish their final projects. The EXEC facility was pretty slick. I hated the line editor but didn't know any better. When I got my first real job someone showed me SPF edit and I thought I'd died on gone to heaven. Robert Crawford Abstract Evolutions LLC (210) 913-3822 -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Steve Thompson Sent: Thursday, September 7, 2023 9:24 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: [EXT] Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days You ever work with WYLBUR? Single address space, keeping users from crossing boundaries (RACF, ACF2, Top Secret and WACF). Could edit a library with RECFM=U. So one could keep source there if they wanted. Would, on close compress the PDS to a single extent if it could. Used very low level interfaces for allocation, such that SMS would not even see the file get opened or closed. So I had to finish fixing that so that in an SMS environment, that interface could be turned off (in testing we found we could cause MVS to have to be re-ipled), and then we used SVC99 for all allocations after that (SVC99 takes a lot of resources as I recall). Had its own scripting language, so applications were written to run inside of Wylbur. With the SRB mode, we could read JES2 spool directly (this was a problem, that I was going to fix when I got to implementing SAF sigh.) I have forgotten all the stuff that Wylbur did with stack processing, and all so it could handle 250 simultaneous users in one address space. That was another thing I needed to fix. I needed to change Wylbur Paging to use a larger number of pages to accommodate more users. (yes, it did its own paging, and interestingly enough, CICS was following along with what we did so that CICS/TS was doing what we had just done with task management). I absolutely loved working on Wylbur, best job I ever had after Amdahl MDF. Steve Thompson On 9/7/2023 9:15 PM, Leonard D Woren wrote: > Bill Johnson wrote on 9/7/2023 1:05 PM: >> We used to use ROSCOE at a small shop in the 80’s because it used >> less resources. I hated it. > > ROSCOE was one of a collection of TSO alternatives, which were all > junk. TONE, ACEP, Wylbur, maybe more that I don't remember. They all > had 1 two-pronged design goal: except for Wylbur, a PITA in its own > category, allow TSO-like online use without the perceived overhead of > TSO, and also, they would run on systems other than MVS. > > The reason the resource utilization of all of those was lower than TSO > is that it took longer for programmers to get their work done, so the > resource utilization was spread out over more elapsed time, lowering > the apparent resources used in a given elapsed time period, but also > lowering productivity. Something beancounters generally don't factor > because they don't understand it. They liked the fact that a given > set of hardware could support 50 (choose your poison from above) > online users while TSO could support only 25. > > Fortunately, we're way past hardware costing more than people. > > > /Leonard > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- The information contained in this message is confidential, protected from disclosure and may be legally privileged. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you a
Re: [EXT] Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
I used WYLBUR at Texas A University in the early 80's. It worked well enough for undergraduate programmers although it got very slow towards the end of the semester when everybody was trying to finish their final projects. The EXEC facility was pretty slick. I hated the line editor but didn't know any better. When I got my first real job someone showed me SPF edit and I thought I'd died on gone to heaven. Robert Crawford Abstract Evolutions LLC (210) 913-3822 -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Steve Thompson Sent: Thursday, September 7, 2023 9:24 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: [EXT] Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days You ever work with WYLBUR? Single address space, keeping users from crossing boundaries (RACF, ACF2, Top Secret and WACF). Could edit a library with RECFM=U. So one could keep source there if they wanted. Would, on close compress the PDS to a single extent if it could. Used very low level interfaces for allocation, such that SMS would not even see the file get opened or closed. So I had to finish fixing that so that in an SMS environment, that interface could be turned off (in testing we found we could cause MVS to have to be re-ipled), and then we used SVC99 for all allocations after that (SVC99 takes a lot of resources as I recall). Had its own scripting language, so applications were written to run inside of Wylbur. With the SRB mode, we could read JES2 spool directly (this was a problem, that I was going to fix when I got to implementing SAF sigh.) I have forgotten all the stuff that Wylbur did with stack processing, and all so it could handle 250 simultaneous users in one address space. That was another thing I needed to fix. I needed to change Wylbur Paging to use a larger number of pages to accommodate more users. (yes, it did its own paging, and interestingly enough, CICS was following along with what we did so that CICS/TS was doing what we had just done with task management). I absolutely loved working on Wylbur, best job I ever had after Amdahl MDF. Steve Thompson On 9/7/2023 9:15 PM, Leonard D Woren wrote: > Bill Johnson wrote on 9/7/2023 1:05 PM: >> We used to use ROSCOE at a small shop in the 80’s because it used >> less resources. I hated it. > > ROSCOE was one of a collection of TSO alternatives, which were all > junk. TONE, ACEP, Wylbur, maybe more that I don't remember. They all > had 1 two-pronged design goal: except for Wylbur, a PITA in its own > category, allow TSO-like online use without the perceived overhead of > TSO, and also, they would run on systems other than MVS. > > The reason the resource utilization of all of those was lower than TSO > is that it took longer for programmers to get their work done, so the > resource utilization was spread out over more elapsed time, lowering > the apparent resources used in a given elapsed time period, but also > lowering productivity. Something beancounters generally don't factor > because they don't understand it. They liked the fact that a given > set of hardware could support 50 (choose your poison from above) > online users while TSO could support only 25. > > Fortunately, we're way past hardware costing more than people. > > > /Leonard > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
I used SuperWylbur, but even in the free version you had associative ranges, which greatly simplified many editing tasks. From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Steve Thompson Sent: Thursday, September 7, 2023 10:24 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days You ever work with WYLBUR? Single address space, keeping users from crossing boundaries (RACF, ACF2, Top Secret and WACF). Could edit a library with RECFM=U. So one could keep source there if they wanted. Would, on close compress the PDS to a single extent if it could. Used very low level interfaces for allocation, such that SMS would not even see the file get opened or closed. So I had to finish fixing that so that in an SMS environment, that interface could be turned off (in testing we found we could cause MVS to have to be re-ipled), and then we used SVC99 for all allocations after that (SVC99 takes a lot of resources as I recall). Had its own scripting language, so applications were written to run inside of Wylbur. With the SRB mode, we could read JES2 spool directly (this was a problem, that I was going to fix when I got to implementing SAF sigh.) I have forgotten all the stuff that Wylbur did with stack processing, and all so it could handle 250 simultaneous users in one address space. That was another thing I needed to fix. I needed to change Wylbur Paging to use a larger number of pages to accommodate more users. (yes, it did its own paging, and interestingly enough, CICS was following along with what we did so that CICS/TS was doing what we had just done with task management). I absolutely loved working on Wylbur, best job I ever had after Amdahl MDF. Steve Thompson On 9/7/2023 9:15 PM, Leonard D Woren wrote: > Bill Johnson wrote on 9/7/2023 1:05 PM: >> We used to use ROSCOE at a small shop in the 80’s because it >> used less resources. I hated it. > > ROSCOE was one of a collection of TSO alternatives, which were > all junk. TONE, ACEP, Wylbur, maybe more that I don't > remember. They all had 1 two-pronged design goal: except for > Wylbur, a PITA in its own category, allow TSO-like online use > without the perceived overhead of TSO, and also, they would run > on systems other than MVS. > > The reason the resource utilization of all of those was lower > than TSO is that it took longer for programmers to get their > work done, so the resource utilization was spread out over more > elapsed time, lowering the apparent resources used in a given > elapsed time period, but also lowering productivity. Something > beancounters generally don't factor because they don't > understand it. They liked the fact that a given set of > hardware could support 50 (choose your poison from above) > online users while TSO could support only 25. > > Fortunately, we're way past hardware costing more than people. > > > /Leonard > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO > IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
You ever work with WYLBUR? Single address space, keeping users from crossing boundaries (RACF, ACF2, Top Secret and WACF). Could edit a library with RECFM=U. So one could keep source there if they wanted. Would, on close compress the PDS to a single extent if it could. Used very low level interfaces for allocation, such that SMS would not even see the file get opened or closed. So I had to finish fixing that so that in an SMS environment, that interface could be turned off (in testing we found we could cause MVS to have to be re-ipled), and then we used SVC99 for all allocations after that (SVC99 takes a lot of resources as I recall). Had its own scripting language, so applications were written to run inside of Wylbur. With the SRB mode, we could read JES2 spool directly (this was a problem, that I was going to fix when I got to implementing SAF sigh.) I have forgotten all the stuff that Wylbur did with stack processing, and all so it could handle 250 simultaneous users in one address space. That was another thing I needed to fix. I needed to change Wylbur Paging to use a larger number of pages to accommodate more users. (yes, it did its own paging, and interestingly enough, CICS was following along with what we did so that CICS/TS was doing what we had just done with task management). I absolutely loved working on Wylbur, best job I ever had after Amdahl MDF. Steve Thompson On 9/7/2023 9:15 PM, Leonard D Woren wrote: Bill Johnson wrote on 9/7/2023 1:05 PM: We used to use ROSCOE at a small shop in the 80’s because it used less resources. I hated it. ROSCOE was one of a collection of TSO alternatives, which were all junk. TONE, ACEP, Wylbur, maybe more that I don't remember. They all had 1 two-pronged design goal: except for Wylbur, a PITA in its own category, allow TSO-like online use without the perceived overhead of TSO, and also, they would run on systems other than MVS. The reason the resource utilization of all of those was lower than TSO is that it took longer for programmers to get their work done, so the resource utilization was spread out over more elapsed time, lowering the apparent resources used in a given elapsed time period, but also lowering productivity. Something beancounters generally don't factor because they don't understand it. They liked the fact that a given set of hardware could support 50 (choose your poison from above) online users while TSO could support only 25. Fortunately, we're way past hardware costing more than people. /Leonard -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
I agree. ROSCOE was clunky & less productive. I’ve never used the other TSO alternatives. I seem to remember vaguely ROSCOE requiring the user to “attach” the member you wanted to edit but that was 35 years ago. Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Thursday, September 7, 2023, 9:15 PM, Leonard D Woren wrote: Bill Johnson wrote on 9/7/2023 1:05 PM: > We used to use ROSCOE at a small shop in the 80’s because it used less > resources. I hated it. ROSCOE was one of a collection of TSO alternatives, which were all junk. TONE, ACEP, Wylbur, maybe more that I don't remember. They all had 1 two-pronged design goal: except for Wylbur, a PITA in its own category, allow TSO-like online use without the perceived overhead of TSO, and also, they would run on systems other than MVS. The reason the resource utilization of all of those was lower than TSO is that it took longer for programmers to get their work done, so the resource utilization was spread out over more elapsed time, lowering the apparent resources used in a given elapsed time period, but also lowering productivity. Something beancounters generally don't factor because they don't understand it. They liked the fact that a given set of hardware could support 50 (choose your poison from above) online users while TSO could support only 25. Fortunately, we're way past hardware costing more than people. /Leonard -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
Roscoe was one address space so everything was there when you logged in. Much like using a CICS editor. On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 8:15 PM Leonard D Woren wrote: > > Bill Johnson wrote on 9/7/2023 1:05 PM: > > We used to use ROSCOE at a small shop in the 80’s because it used less > > resources. I hated it. > > ROSCOE was one of a collection of TSO alternatives, which were all > junk. TONE, ACEP, Wylbur, maybe more that I don't remember. They all > had 1 two-pronged design goal: except for Wylbur, a PITA in its own > category, allow TSO-like online use without the perceived overhead of > TSO, and also, they would run on systems other than MVS. > > The reason the resource utilization of all of those was lower than TSO > is that it took longer for programmers to get their work done, so the > resource utilization was spread out over more elapsed time, lowering > the apparent resources used in a given elapsed time period, but also > lowering productivity. Something beancounters generally don't factor > because they don't understand it. They liked the fact that a given > set of hardware could support 50 (choose your poison from above) > online users while TSO could support only 25. > > Fortunately, we're way past hardware costing more than people. > > > /Leonard > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
Bill Johnson wrote on 9/7/2023 1:05 PM: We used to use ROSCOE at a small shop in the 80’s because it used less resources. I hated it. ROSCOE was one of a collection of TSO alternatives, which were all junk. TONE, ACEP, Wylbur, maybe more that I don't remember. They all had 1 two-pronged design goal: except for Wylbur, a PITA in its own category, allow TSO-like online use without the perceived overhead of TSO, and also, they would run on systems other than MVS. The reason the resource utilization of all of those was lower than TSO is that it took longer for programmers to get their work done, so the resource utilization was spread out over more elapsed time, lowering the apparent resources used in a given elapsed time period, but also lowering productivity. Something beancounters generally don't factor because they don't understand it. They liked the fact that a given set of hardware could support 50 (choose your poison from above) online users while TSO could support only 25. Fortunately, we're way past hardware costing more than people. /Leonard -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
I used ROSCOE in a couple of sites. Once you got used to it, it was better than TSO EDIT with the same footprint. RPF was easier to master than ISPF/PDF and it had a lot of similarities with REXX. I regressed back to a DOS/VSE shop for a while. A 4331 with 1 MB of memory. We managed to run CICS with ADABAS and write all the code in PL/I. ICCF was our only editor. It was a dog. A few years later I found myself in another VSE shop and they had VOLLIE. Way better than ICCF. On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 10:42 AM Roberto Halais wrote: > This list is becoming like Tik Tok. Enough. > > On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 8:37 PM Lance D. Jackson < > ljack...@pandrueassociates.com> wrote: > > > UNSUBSCRIBE- I'm OUT! You guys go on far too long about stories no one > > else is interested in. You should consider taking these drawn out > > discussions offline. > > > > > On 07/09/2023 15:56 EDT Leonard D Woren > wrote: > > > > > > > > > What was the first OS that you had a 2 MB TSO region? What hardware. > > > > > > MVT TSO on the 4 MB 360/91 at UCLA was about 3/4 MB . There was a lot > > > you could do, although it was slow. I did experiment with overlay > > > modules though. Bleah. > > > > > > The reason you could do a lot in 3/4 MB is that it was done in > > > efficient languages, like Assembler. None of these modern bloatware > > > languages that make every app on my phone 32 MB minimum, and often up > > > to 500 MB. > > > > > > /Leonard > > > > > > > > > Seymour J Metz wrote on 9/7/2023 3:32 AM: > > > > I never had TSO in less than 2 MiB; 768 KiB gives me shudders. > > > > > > > > ________________ > > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on > > behalf of Clem Clarke > > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 6:38 AM > > > > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > > > > Subject: Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early > days > > > > > > > > > > > > Running TSO in 3/4 of a meg was interesting. And VERY slow. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- Wayne V. Bickerdike -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
This list is becoming like Tik Tok. Enough. On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 8:37 PM Lance D. Jackson < ljack...@pandrueassociates.com> wrote: > UNSUBSCRIBE- I'm OUT! You guys go on far too long about stories no one > else is interested in. You should consider taking these drawn out > discussions offline. > > > On 07/09/2023 15:56 EDT Leonard D Woren wrote: > > > > > > What was the first OS that you had a 2 MB TSO region? What hardware. > > > > MVT TSO on the 4 MB 360/91 at UCLA was about 3/4 MB . There was a lot > > you could do, although it was slow. I did experiment with overlay > > modules though. Bleah. > > > > The reason you could do a lot in 3/4 MB is that it was done in > > efficient languages, like Assembler. None of these modern bloatware > > languages that make every app on my phone 32 MB minimum, and often up > > to 500 MB. > > > > /Leonard > > > > > > Seymour J Metz wrote on 9/7/2023 3:32 AM: > > > I never had TSO in less than 2 MiB; 768 KiB gives me shudders. > > > > > > > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on > behalf of Clem Clarke > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 6:38 AM > > > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > > > Subject: Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days > > > > > > > > > Running TSO in 3/4 of a meg was interesting. And VERY slow. > > > > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
UNSUBSCRIBE- I'm OUT! You guys go on far too long about stories no one else is interested in. You should consider taking these drawn out discussions offline. > On 07/09/2023 15:56 EDT Leonard D Woren wrote: > > > What was the first OS that you had a 2 MB TSO region? What hardware. > > MVT TSO on the 4 MB 360/91 at UCLA was about 3/4 MB . There was a lot > you could do, although it was slow. I did experiment with overlay > modules though. Bleah. > > The reason you could do a lot in 3/4 MB is that it was done in > efficient languages, like Assembler. None of these modern bloatware > languages that make every app on my phone 32 MB minimum, and often up > to 500 MB. > > /Leonard > > > Seymour J Metz wrote on 9/7/2023 3:32 AM: > > I never had TSO in less than 2 MiB; 768 KiB gives me shudders. > > > > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of > > Clem Clarke > > Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 6:38 AM > > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > > Subject: Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days > > > > > > Running TSO in 3/4 of a meg was interesting. And VERY slow. > > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
Agree. Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Thursday, September 7, 2023, 8:00 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote: We used it at a bank because of the number of application developers. TSO was reserved for system programmers. Also, it was limited in what you could do with the OS. made sense for the purpose but it was not a lot of fun. It was like being moderated at every turn. TSO, was, Liberating. Matt Hogstrom PGP key 0F143BC1 > On Sep 7, 2023, at 15:41, Bob Bridges wrote: > > We used to use ROSCOE at a small shop in the 80’s because it used less > resources. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
I didn’t start it. But, I’ll bet I get the warnings. Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Thursday, September 7, 2023, 7:21 PM, Bob Bridges wrote: And, they're off again. --- Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313 /* "If dickering won't work, then you have to fight. But I think maybe it takes a man who has been shot at to appreciate how much better it is to fumble your way through a political compromise rather than have the top of your head blown off." He frowned and suddenly looked very old. "When to talk and when to fight -- that is the most difficult decision to make wisely of all the decisions in life." -from _Podkayne of Mars_, by Robert A Heinlein */ -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of David Spiegel Sent: Thursday, September 7, 2023 18:50 Hi Bill, You said: "... because it used less resources ..." Shmegegge, you should've said "fewer". That is the correct usage. For a guy who knows so much about about a multitude of topics, it behooves you to write more correctly. It might even increase your credibility. --- On 2023-09-07 16:05, Bill Johnson wrote: > We used to use ROSCOE at a small shop in the 80’s because it used less > resources. I hated it. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
1972-3. My high school was rated one of the best high schools in America. And just recently received an award for being one of the best again. (Last week) The Ohio rankings are dragged down by white rural MAGA schools and inner city students. The suburban schools in my area are top performers, nationally. I’ve been published approximately 100 times in the local newspaper. Also in Information Week. Mostly political in the newspaper. Because I’m politically active. I also ran for commissioner. Ran 2 businesses, including one that did business with the mafia. Was on the Millionaire show with Regis. Missed the hot seat by .08. I was 4 time spelling runner up in grade school. My spelling and grammar can be perfect when I care. Which I don’t on this list. Heck, some posters are barely literate. I’m making you the grammar and spelling police. Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Thursday, September 7, 2023, 7:14 PM, David Spiegel <0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: Hi Bill, According to a recent study, Ohio ranked 36. I'm not so sure I would want to boast about that. Please see: 2023’s States with the Best & Worst School Systems (wallethub.com)<https://wallethub.com/edu/e/states-with-the-best-schools/5335> Regards, David [https://cdn.wallethub.com/wallethub/posts/94009/states-with-the-best-worst-school-systems.png]<https://wallethub.com/edu/e/states-with-the-best-schools/5335> 2023’s States with the Best & Worst School Systems<https://wallethub.com/edu/e/states-with-the-best-schools/5335> wallethub.com From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Bill Johnson <0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> Sent: September 7, 2023 6:59 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days Ohio, I was at the top in Algebra and Geometry. Early 70’s. I still have the awards program. I’m very proud of it and my Math expertise paid off handsomely. Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Thursday, September 7, 2023, 6:50 PM, David Spiegel <0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: Hi Bill, You said: "... because it used less resources ..." Shmegegge, you should've said "fewer". That is the correct usage. For a guy who knows so much about about a multitude of topics, it behooves you to write more correctly. It might even increase your credibility. Regards, David On 2023-09-07 16:05, Bill Johnson wrote: > We used to use ROSCOE at a small shop in the 80’s because it used less > resources. I hated it. > > > Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone > > > On Thursday, September 7, 2023, 3:56 PM, Leonard D Woren > wrote: > > What was the first OS that you had a 2 MB TSO region? What hardware. > > MVT TSO on the 4 MB 360/91 at UCLA was about 3/4 MB . There was a lot > you could do, although it was slow. I did experiment with overlay > modules though. Bleah. > > The reason you could do a lot in 3/4 MB is that it was done in > efficient languages, like Assembler. None of these modern bloatware > languages that make every app on my phone 32 MB minimum, and often up > to 500 MB. > > /Leonard > > > Seymour J Metz wrote on 9/7/2023 3:32 AM: >> I never had TSO in less than 2 MiB; 768 KiB gives me shudders. >> >> >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of >> Clem Clarke >> Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 6:38 AM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days >> >> >> Running TSO in 3/4 of a meg was interesting. And VERY slow. >> > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
We used it at a bank because of the number of application developers. TSO was reserved for system programmers. Also, it was limited in what you could do with the OS. made sense for the purpose but it was not a lot of fun. It was like being moderated at every turn. TSO, was, Liberating. Matt Hogstrom PGP key 0F143BC1 > On Sep 7, 2023, at 15:41, Bob Bridges wrote: > > We used to use ROSCOE at a small shop in the 80’s because it used less > resources. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
And, they're off again. --- Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313 /* "If dickering won't work, then you have to fight. But I think maybe it takes a man who has been shot at to appreciate how much better it is to fumble your way through a political compromise rather than have the top of your head blown off." He frowned and suddenly looked very old. "When to talk and when to fight -- that is the most difficult decision to make wisely of all the decisions in life." -from _Podkayne of Mars_, by Robert A Heinlein */ -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of David Spiegel Sent: Thursday, September 7, 2023 18:50 Hi Bill, You said: "... because it used less resources ..." Shmegegge, you should've said "fewer". That is the correct usage. For a guy who knows so much about about a multitude of topics, it behooves you to write more correctly. It might even increase your credibility. --- On 2023-09-07 16:05, Bill Johnson wrote: > We used to use ROSCOE at a small shop in the 80’s because it used less > resources. I hated it. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
English your second language? The program from the awards ceremony. I still have it. Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Thursday, September 7, 2023, 7:15 PM, David Spiegel <0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: Hi Bill, You said: "... I still have the awards program ..." Please translate this statement into English. Regards, David From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Bill Johnson <0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> Sent: September 7, 2023 6:59 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days Ohio, I was at the top in Algebra and Geometry. Early 70’s. I still have the awards program. I’m very proud of it and my Math expertise paid off handsomely. Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Thursday, September 7, 2023, 6:50 PM, David Spiegel <0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: Hi Bill, You said: "... because it used less resources ..." Shmegegge, you should've said "fewer". That is the correct usage. For a guy who knows so much about about a multitude of topics, it behooves you to write more correctly. It might even increase your credibility. Regards, David On 2023-09-07 16:05, Bill Johnson wrote: > We used to use ROSCOE at a small shop in the 80’s because it used less > resources. I hated it. > > > Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone > > > On Thursday, September 7, 2023, 3:56 PM, Leonard D Woren > wrote: > > What was the first OS that you had a 2 MB TSO region? What hardware. > > MVT TSO on the 4 MB 360/91 at UCLA was about 3/4 MB . There was a lot > you could do, although it was slow. I did experiment with overlay > modules though. Bleah. > > The reason you could do a lot in 3/4 MB is that it was done in > efficient languages, like Assembler. None of these modern bloatware > languages that make every app on my phone 32 MB minimum, and often up > to 500 MB. > > /Leonard > > > Seymour J Metz wrote on 9/7/2023 3:32 AM: >> I never had TSO in less than 2 MiB; 768 KiB gives me shudders. >> >> >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of >> Clem Clarke >> Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 6:38 AM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days >> >> >> Running TSO in 3/4 of a meg was interesting. And VERY slow. >> > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
Hi Bill, You said: "... I still have the awards program ..." Please translate this statement into English. Regards, David From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Bill Johnson <0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> Sent: September 7, 2023 6:59 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days Ohio, I was at the top in Algebra and Geometry. Early 70’s. I still have the awards program. I’m very proud of it and my Math expertise paid off handsomely. Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Thursday, September 7, 2023, 6:50 PM, David Spiegel <0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: Hi Bill, You said: "... because it used less resources ..." Shmegegge, you should've said "fewer". That is the correct usage. For a guy who knows so much about about a multitude of topics, it behooves you to write more correctly. It might even increase your credibility. Regards, David On 2023-09-07 16:05, Bill Johnson wrote: > We used to use ROSCOE at a small shop in the 80’s because it used less > resources. I hated it. > > > Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone > > > On Thursday, September 7, 2023, 3:56 PM, Leonard D Woren > wrote: > > What was the first OS that you had a 2 MB TSO region? What hardware. > > MVT TSO on the 4 MB 360/91 at UCLA was about 3/4 MB . There was a lot > you could do, although it was slow. I did experiment with overlay > modules though. Bleah. > > The reason you could do a lot in 3/4 MB is that it was done in > efficient languages, like Assembler. None of these modern bloatware > languages that make every app on my phone 32 MB minimum, and often up > to 500 MB. > > /Leonard > > > Seymour J Metz wrote on 9/7/2023 3:32 AM: >> I never had TSO in less than 2 MiB; 768 KiB gives me shudders. >> >> >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of >> Clem Clarke >> Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 6:38 AM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days >> >> >> Running TSO in 3/4 of a meg was interesting. And VERY slow. >> > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
Hi Bill, According to a recent study, Ohio ranked 36. I'm not so sure I would want to boast about that. Please see: 2023’s States with the Best & Worst School Systems (wallethub.com)<https://wallethub.com/edu/e/states-with-the-best-schools/5335> Regards, David [https://cdn.wallethub.com/wallethub/posts/94009/states-with-the-best-worst-school-systems.png]<https://wallethub.com/edu/e/states-with-the-best-schools/5335> 2023’s States with the Best & Worst School Systems<https://wallethub.com/edu/e/states-with-the-best-schools/5335> wallethub.com From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Bill Johnson <0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> Sent: September 7, 2023 6:59 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days Ohio, I was at the top in Algebra and Geometry. Early 70’s. I still have the awards program. I’m very proud of it and my Math expertise paid off handsomely. Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Thursday, September 7, 2023, 6:50 PM, David Spiegel <0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: Hi Bill, You said: "... because it used less resources ..." Shmegegge, you should've said "fewer". That is the correct usage. For a guy who knows so much about about a multitude of topics, it behooves you to write more correctly. It might even increase your credibility. Regards, David On 2023-09-07 16:05, Bill Johnson wrote: > We used to use ROSCOE at a small shop in the 80’s because it used less > resources. I hated it. > > > Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone > > > On Thursday, September 7, 2023, 3:56 PM, Leonard D Woren > wrote: > > What was the first OS that you had a 2 MB TSO region? What hardware. > > MVT TSO on the 4 MB 360/91 at UCLA was about 3/4 MB . There was a lot > you could do, although it was slow. I did experiment with overlay > modules though. Bleah. > > The reason you could do a lot in 3/4 MB is that it was done in > efficient languages, like Assembler. None of these modern bloatware > languages that make every app on my phone 32 MB minimum, and often up > to 500 MB. > > /Leonard > > > Seymour J Metz wrote on 9/7/2023 3:32 AM: >> I never had TSO in less than 2 MiB; 768 KiB gives me shudders. >> >> >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of >> Clem Clarke >> Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 6:38 AM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days >> >> >> Running TSO in 3/4 of a meg was interesting. And VERY slow. >> > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
Ohio, I was at the top in Algebra and Geometry. Early 70’s. I still have the awards program. I’m very proud of it and my Math expertise paid off handsomely. Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Thursday, September 7, 2023, 6:50 PM, David Spiegel <0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: Hi Bill, You said: "... because it used less resources ..." Shmegegge, you should've said "fewer". That is the correct usage. For a guy who knows so much about about a multitude of topics, it behooves you to write more correctly. It might even increase your credibility. Regards, David On 2023-09-07 16:05, Bill Johnson wrote: > We used to use ROSCOE at a small shop in the 80’s because it used less > resources. I hated it. > > > Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone > > > On Thursday, September 7, 2023, 3:56 PM, Leonard D Woren > wrote: > > What was the first OS that you had a 2 MB TSO region? What hardware. > > MVT TSO on the 4 MB 360/91 at UCLA was about 3/4 MB . There was a lot > you could do, although it was slow. I did experiment with overlay > modules though. Bleah. > > The reason you could do a lot in 3/4 MB is that it was done in > efficient languages, like Assembler. None of these modern bloatware > languages that make every app on my phone 32 MB minimum, and often up > to 500 MB. > > /Leonard > > > Seymour J Metz wrote on 9/7/2023 3:32 AM: >> I never had TSO in less than 2 MiB; 768 KiB gives me shudders. >> >> >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of >> Clem Clarke >> Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 6:38 AM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days >> >> >> Running TSO in 3/4 of a meg was interesting. And VERY slow. >> > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
LOLOLOLOL, I love that you’re obsessed with me. Are you getting enough sleep? Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Thursday, September 7, 2023, 6:50 PM, David Spiegel <0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: Hi Bill, You said: "... because it used less resources ..." Shmegegge, you should've said "fewer". That is the correct usage. For a guy who knows so much about about a multitude of topics, it behooves you to write more correctly. It might even increase your credibility. Regards, David On 2023-09-07 16:05, Bill Johnson wrote: > We used to use ROSCOE at a small shop in the 80’s because it used less > resources. I hated it. > > > Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone > > > On Thursday, September 7, 2023, 3:56 PM, Leonard D Woren > wrote: > > What was the first OS that you had a 2 MB TSO region? What hardware. > > MVT TSO on the 4 MB 360/91 at UCLA was about 3/4 MB . There was a lot > you could do, although it was slow. I did experiment with overlay > modules though. Bleah. > > The reason you could do a lot in 3/4 MB is that it was done in > efficient languages, like Assembler. None of these modern bloatware > languages that make every app on my phone 32 MB minimum, and often up > to 500 MB. > > /Leonard > > > Seymour J Metz wrote on 9/7/2023 3:32 AM: >> I never had TSO in less than 2 MiB; 768 KiB gives me shudders. >> >> >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of >> Clem Clarke >> Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 6:38 AM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days >> >> >> Running TSO in 3/4 of a meg was interesting. And VERY slow. >> > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
Hi Bill, You said: "... because it used less resources ..." Shmegegge, you should've said "fewer". That is the correct usage. For a guy who knows so much about about a multitude of topics, it behooves you to write more correctly. It might even increase your credibility. Regards, David On 2023-09-07 16:05, Bill Johnson wrote: We used to use ROSCOE at a small shop in the 80’s because it used less resources. I hated it. Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Thursday, September 7, 2023, 3:56 PM, Leonard D Woren wrote: What was the first OS that you had a 2 MB TSO region? What hardware. MVT TSO on the 4 MB 360/91 at UCLA was about 3/4 MB . There was a lot you could do, although it was slow. I did experiment with overlay modules though. Bleah. The reason you could do a lot in 3/4 MB is that it was done in efficient languages, like Assembler. None of these modern bloatware languages that make every app on my phone 32 MB minimum, and often up to 500 MB. /Leonard Seymour J Metz wrote on 9/7/2023 3:32 AM: I never had TSO in less than 2 MiB; 768 KiB gives me shudders. From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Clem Clarke Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 6:38 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days Running TSO in 3/4 of a meg was interesting. And VERY slow. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
Not a 2 MiB region; that was the installed memory. I don't recall how big our TSO regions were. This was on a 370/165 running OS/360, then upgraded* to a 370/168 running SVS. We had a fixd-head disk, which helped performance. The students ran PL/I and FORTRAN programs on TSO, not just assembler. * Yes, I know, you supposedly can only upgrade to a 370/165 II, but IBM really did not want the Technion to go to CDC. From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Leonard D Woren Sent: Thursday, September 7, 2023 3:56 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days What was the first OS that you had a 2 MB TSO region? What hardware. MVT TSO on the 4 MB 360/91 at UCLA was about 3/4 MB . There was a lot you could do, although it was slow. I did experiment with overlay modules though. Bleah. The reason you could do a lot in 3/4 MB is that it was done in efficient languages, like Assembler. None of these modern bloatware languages that make every app on my phone 32 MB minimum, and often up to 500 MB. /Leonard Seymour J Metz wrote on 9/7/2023 3:32 AM: > I never had TSO in less than 2 MiB; 768 KiB gives me shudders. > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of > Clem Clarke > Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 6:38 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days > > > Running TSO in 3/4 of a meg was interesting. And VERY slow. > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
I had been using TSO/ISPF for a decade mostly at GM, then EDS when GM bought them. Before accepting the job at the small local company (hospital) that used ROSCOE. In my programming days. Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Thursday, September 7, 2023, 4:41 PM, Bob Bridges wrote: If you can explain why without deriding anyone, Bill, I'd be interested in knowing why. I first encountered ROSCOE in 1980 and used it for a while without thinking much about it. When I realized I could change things around in it, I got excited. It was another two years before I was exposed to ISPF. I still have ROSCOE on my resume, but there isn't much excuse for it; I haven't touched it since then, so if anyone asked me to do anything with it I'd have to start over. If you were already familiar with ISPF and thought ROSCOE a poorer product, I guess that makes sense. I didn't know anything about ISPF until ~after~ ROSCOE, so I was unable to compare them. --- Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313 /* A woman means by Unselfishness chiefly taking trouble for others; a man means not giving trouble for othersThus while the woman thinks of doing good offices and the man of respecting other people's rights, each sex, without any obvious unreason, can and does regard the other as radically selfish. -from The Screwtape Letters by C S Lewis */ -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Bill Johnson Sent: Thursday, September 7, 2023 16:06 We used to use ROSCOE at a small shop in the 80’s because it used less resources. I hated it. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
If you can explain why without deriding anyone, Bill, I'd be interested in knowing why. I first encountered ROSCOE in 1980 and used it for a while without thinking much about it. When I realized I could change things around in it, I got excited. It was another two years before I was exposed to ISPF. I still have ROSCOE on my resume, but there isn't much excuse for it; I haven't touched it since then, so if anyone asked me to do anything with it I'd have to start over. If you were already familiar with ISPF and thought ROSCOE a poorer product, I guess that makes sense. I didn't know anything about ISPF until ~after~ ROSCOE, so I was unable to compare them. --- Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313 /* A woman means by Unselfishness chiefly taking trouble for others; a man means not giving trouble for othersThus while the woman thinks of doing good offices and the man of respecting other people's rights, each sex, without any obvious unreason, can and does regard the other as radically selfish. -from The Screwtape Letters by C S Lewis */ -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Bill Johnson Sent: Thursday, September 7, 2023 16:06 We used to use ROSCOE at a small shop in the 80’s because it used less resources. I hated it. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
We used to use ROSCOE at a small shop in the 80’s because it used less resources. I hated it. Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Thursday, September 7, 2023, 3:56 PM, Leonard D Woren wrote: What was the first OS that you had a 2 MB TSO region? What hardware. MVT TSO on the 4 MB 360/91 at UCLA was about 3/4 MB . There was a lot you could do, although it was slow. I did experiment with overlay modules though. Bleah. The reason you could do a lot in 3/4 MB is that it was done in efficient languages, like Assembler. None of these modern bloatware languages that make every app on my phone 32 MB minimum, and often up to 500 MB. /Leonard Seymour J Metz wrote on 9/7/2023 3:32 AM: > I never had TSO in less than 2 MiB; 768 KiB gives me shudders. > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of > Clem Clarke > Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 6:38 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days > > > Running TSO in 3/4 of a meg was interesting. And VERY slow. > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
What was the first OS that you had a 2 MB TSO region? What hardware. MVT TSO on the 4 MB 360/91 at UCLA was about 3/4 MB . There was a lot you could do, although it was slow. I did experiment with overlay modules though. Bleah. The reason you could do a lot in 3/4 MB is that it was done in efficient languages, like Assembler. None of these modern bloatware languages that make every app on my phone 32 MB minimum, and often up to 500 MB. /Leonard Seymour J Metz wrote on 9/7/2023 3:32 AM: I never had TSO in less than 2 MiB; 768 KiB gives me shudders. From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Clem Clarke Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 6:38 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days Running TSO in 3/4 of a meg was interesting. And VERY slow. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
Dead tree? That was excusable in the 1960s, but it's a lot harder to find things on paper. If the programmer didn't have a SYSMDUMP I can at least browse the dump on SPOOL; releasing the dump to print just adds to the work. I never had TSO in less than 2 MiB; 768 KiB gives me shudders. From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Clem Clarke Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 6:38 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days I used to arrive at work every morning to have to wade through a two foot high paper system dump to see why an OS abend had occurred that night. Every night, pretty well in the early days! MFT, MVT, MVS. MVS was a LOT better. Running TSO in 3/4 of a meg was interesting. And VERY slow. We used to keep the IBM SE's pretty busy in the 1960's and 1970's. Shell Oil Melbourne used to have English Electric Leo computers, and moved to an IBM 65. The English Leos were pretty much the first commercial computers available. Fully multi programming in the '60s. And we were seriously into PL./I - all our Cleo programs were converted to PL/I (F). CLEO was a bit like COBOL - absolutely excellent for commercial programs. Clem Colin Paice wrote: > I remember going to a customer to discuss a deep technical problem. Before > they let us into the inner sanctum were given a dump and were asked "what's > the problem?" My colleague looked at it and said there is a program check > at this address, and this is fixed in ptf uy " come on in you've > passed" they said . They said this weeded out non technical people > > On Tue, Sep 5, 2023, 23:32 Bernd Oppolzer > wrote: > >> Hi Peter, >> >> this reminds me of another story ... >> >> some day my customer (a large insurance company here in Germany) asked >> me to talk with their IBM rep, >> because we had a severe problem with one of the DB2 components which I >> discovered, and I was asked to >> have IBM fix it or otherwise provide a solution of my own (it was in the >> DB2 interface for Batch - CAF - IIRC, >> and it used 5 % of the overall CPU in some of our IMS regions simply by >> walking sequentially through >> some MVS control blocks chains) >> >> So I called the IBM rep, and the first thing he asked me was: "are you a >> systems programmer"? >> and, although I wasn't sure at that time what that means, I said: "yes, >> but why do you want to know?", >> and he said: "well, if not, we're not gonna talk with you" >> >> :-) >> >> Kind regards >> >> Bernd >> >> >> Am 04.09.2023 um 16:23 schrieb Peter Sylvester: >>> Namen sind Schall und Rauch, >>> >>> Some parts of the discussion reminds me to Lewis Carroll, Through the >>> looking glass. >>> >>> It reminds me to the citation that that I made in ibmmail descript >>> >>> https://www.funet.fi/pub/doc/netinfo/EARN/ (There are some other >>> gems in that directory). >>> >>> "song" = "what is your profession." >>> >>> >>> Peter Sylvester >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN >> -- >> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN >> > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
Please can this conversation be moved to the assembler list (and so give it usage!) Thank you Colin On Wed, 6 Sept 2023 at 14:35, Phil Smith III wrote: > Clem, I've never heard of CLEO. Should I assume it's NOT the same CLEO > that comes up when I search "cleo programming language"? That one looks > like some modern scripting thing. > > > > It's pretty interesting these languages that came and went. You'd think > that there would still be pockets of each, but I suppose the death of the > last compiler is what really puts the final nail in the coffin. > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
Clem, I've never heard of CLEO. Should I assume it's NOT the same CLEO that comes up when I search "cleo programming language"? That one looks like some modern scripting thing. It's pretty interesting these languages that came and went. You'd think that there would still be pockets of each, but I suppose the death of the last compiler is what really puts the final nail in the coffin. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days
I used to arrive at work every morning to have to wade through a two foot high paper system dump to see why an OS abend had occurred that night. Every night, pretty well in the early days! MFT, MVT, MVS. MVS was a LOT better. Running TSO in 3/4 of a meg was interesting. And VERY slow. We used to keep the IBM SE's pretty busy in the 1960's and 1970's. Shell Oil Melbourne used to have English Electric Leo computers, and moved to an IBM 65. The English Leos were pretty much the first commercial computers available. Fully multi programming in the '60s. And we were seriously into PL./I - all our Cleo programs were converted to PL/I (F). CLEO was a bit like COBOL - absolutely excellent for commercial programs. Clem Colin Paice wrote: I remember going to a customer to discuss a deep technical problem. Before they let us into the inner sanctum were given a dump and were asked "what's the problem?" My colleague looked at it and said there is a program check at this address, and this is fixed in ptf uy " come on in you've passed" they said . They said this weeded out non technical people On Tue, Sep 5, 2023, 23:32 Bernd Oppolzer wrote: Hi Peter, this reminds me of another story ... some day my customer (a large insurance company here in Germany) asked me to talk with their IBM rep, because we had a severe problem with one of the DB2 components which I discovered, and I was asked to have IBM fix it or otherwise provide a solution of my own (it was in the DB2 interface for Batch - CAF - IIRC, and it used 5 % of the overall CPU in some of our IMS regions simply by walking sequentially through some MVS control blocks chains) So I called the IBM rep, and the first thing he asked me was: "are you a systems programmer"? and, although I wasn't sure at that time what that means, I said: "yes, but why do you want to know?", and he said: "well, if not, we're not gonna talk with you" :-) Kind regards Bernd Am 04.09.2023 um 16:23 schrieb Peter Sylvester: Namen sind Schall und Rauch, Some parts of the discussion reminds me to Lewis Carroll, Through the looking glass. It reminds me to the citation that that I made in ibmmail descript https://www.funet.fi/pub/doc/netinfo/EARN/ (There are some other gems in that directory). "song" = "what is your profession." Peter Sylvester -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
