Re: Learning Rexx (was: Need tutorial)
In 5c8fv3f78unypshw9tyopynk.1388251271...@email.android.com, on 12/28/2013 at 12:21 PM, Charles Mills charl...@mcn.org said: The user-friendly interactive nature of CMS. Rhat would seem to describe TSO as well. The only place where CMS has a clear edge, IMHO, is XEDIT. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Learning Rexx (was: Need tutorial)
Gee, I don't want to pose as an expert in the relative benefits of various Rexx environments. I have near-zero experience on 'nix and USS, no recent (15 years) experience on CMS, and although I have written large systems in Rexx, I am not at present writing much Rexx beyond basic TSO helper scripts. I certainly don't want to contribute to an OS war. I was just answering the question about how to learn Rexx, and if you happen to have access to both, IMHO CMS is a more Rexx-friendly place than TSO. It's really a separate topic, but I think there is little doubt that it makes sense to edit code of any sort in some fast character-at-a-time interactive environment even if the target compile and/or execution environment is z/OS. My particular choice is MS Visual Studio, but I only claim that it makes sense for me, not that it is the best for everyone. Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2013 2:15 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Learning Rexx (was: Need tutorial) On 2013-12-28, at 10:21, Charles Mills wrote: The user-friendly interactive nature of CMS. How would you rank CMS vis-a-vis Unix System Services by this criterion? Before USS was available I tended to edit JCL on CMS with XEDIT; nowadays on Solaris, often accessing legacy data sets with NFS. NFS will deal with PDSE; I suspect that CMS would have trouble ACCESSing a PDSE, and writing to any legacy z/OS data set from CMS is questionable, as is catalog search. I use TSO/ISPF, now as earlier, largely for: o SDSF o DSLIST o DDLIST o Testing with a customer-like environment. I keep one ISPF session active, and as many USS or Solaris as convenient; I've never mastered WSA. (and I have one EXEC that uses ISPF LMGET to process RECFM=U (by override) data sets because EXECIO refuses to deal with U. That's reported to get better in 2.1.) Rexx SYSCALL is a boon (or a least it spares me learning Perl). -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Learning Rexx (was: Need tutorial)
In 07dd01cf055e$eb92e0d0$c2b8a270$@mcn.org, on 12/30/2013 at 07:59 AM, Charles Mills charl...@mcn.org said: It's really a separate topic, but I think there is little doubt that it makes sense to edit code of any sort in some fast character-at-a-time interactive environment even if the target compile and/or execution environment is z/OS. You can't do only one thing, and the Devil is in the details. There is little doubt that it makes sense to edit code of any sort in some fast character-at-a-time interactive environment that offers the same convenience, functionality and speed as the available alternatives. There is also little doubt that it makes sense to use a block mode editor that offers more convenience, functionality and speed than a GUI alternative. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Learning Rexx (was: Need tutorial)
On 2013-12-28, at 10:21, Charles Mills wrote: The user-friendly interactive nature of CMS. How would you rank CMS vis-a-vis Unix System Services by this criterion? Before USS was available I tended to edit JCL on CMS with XEDIT; nowadays on Solaris, often accessing legacy data sets with NFS. NFS will deal with PDSE; I suspect that CMS would have trouble ACCESSing a PDSE, and writing to any legacy z/OS data set from CMS is questionable, as is catalog search. I use TSO/ISPF, now as earlier, largely for: o SDSF o DSLIST o DDLIST o Testing with a customer-like environment. I keep one ISPF session active, and as many USS or Solaris as convenient; I've never mastered WSA. (and I have one EXEC that uses ISPF LMGET to process RECFM=U (by override) data sets because EXECIO refuses to deal with U. That's reported to get better in 2.1.) Rexx SYSCALL is a boon (or a least it spares me learning Perl). -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Learning Rexx (was: Need tutorial)
The user-friendly interactive nature of CMS. Charles Composed on a mobile: please excuse my brevity Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com wrote: On 2013-12-28, at 09:47, Charles Mills wrote: Actually CMS on VM better for rexx than z/OS. Why? (Risking an advocacy thread.) For me, one reason is the CMS HELP facility. In fact, sometimes coding Rexx for z/OS I'll log on to CMS merely to use HELP REXX instruction. Other reasons? -- gil -- 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
