Re: SYSIN in PROC -- technique

[Robert A. Rosenberg]

At 08:03 -0500 on 09/04/2013, Tom Marchant wrote about Re: SYSIN in 
PROC -- technique:



On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 19:30:28 -0500, Paul Gilmartin wrote:


upgrade to JES2.


I have worked in a shop that had both JES2 and JES3 and I appreciated
some of the things that I could do easily on JES3 that were difficult or
impossible on JES2.  For example, Dependent Job Control (DJC) networks.


If DJC is having one job wait for another to finish running or wait 
for a job to create a needed dataset (or release an DISP=OLD lock) 
for a subsequent job to be allowed to start I seem to remember JES2 
mods like the MELLON mod 20 years ago that did this type of Job 
Dependent Job scheduling.




There were some who wanted to convert to JES2, but the shop was to
dependent on JES3 facilities.

--
Tom Marchant

--
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: Who is Lagging Whom? (Was: SYSIN in PROC -- technique)

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <89229058.74b4.44a3.800c.8809e9102...@aol.com>, on 09/04/2013
   at 02:58 AM, efinnell15  said:

>I though that went away when they move CI back to MVS? 

MVS just split the interpretation code of the R/I into separate
Converter and Interpreter functions. Spelling errors in keywords were
detected early, because that was done by the converter, but incorrect
values were not detected until the Converter was called. JES3 called
the Interpreter prior to scheduling and JES2 called the Interpreter
only after scheduling.

-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 Atid/2
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: SYSIN in PROC -- technique

[Ed Jaffe]

On 9/4/2013 8:52 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:

On Wed, 4 Sep 2013 11:27:32 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:


on 09/03/2013 at 07:30 PM, Paul Gilmartin said:


It's logically impossible for JES3 setup to exploit or even
accommodate the newer features of JCL, even dating back to
IF...THEN...ELSE...ENDIF.

Nonsense.


OK.  At least extraordinarily cumbersome.  Consider:


Conditional JCL execution works just fine in JES3 no matter if it's done 
using COND= or IF/THEN/ELSE. (FYI. At the control block level there is 
no difference at all between COND= and IF/THEN/ELSE.) We use conditional 
execution all the time in our JES3 environments. For example, we 
generally do not bind (like-edit) object modules if the compile step 
ends with a return code of eight or higher. We run the same jobs in JES2 
and they behave identically.


It has *always* been true that JES3 LOCATE processing (if enabled) 
treats every step as if it will execute. There is no choice as LOCATE is 
a pre-execution phase. JES3 LOCATE processing ensures a job will not run 
for hours only to fail at O-Dark-Thirty with a "Data Set Not Found" 
condition. It's difficult to measure how many thousands of hours of 
production down-time have been saved worldwide with this feature. Having 
worked "on call" at a JES2-only company for years, I wished more than 
once that our production jobs could be protected by a feature like JES3 
LOCATE. Eventually, we purchased an expensive production control system 
with external features that provided the needed protection, but its use 
was off limits to non-production work so our dev/test groups just had to 
live with things as they were.


It has *always* been true that the objective and implementation of JES3 
LOCATE processing is in conflict with the case in which you'd like to 
dynamically create a data set and then pass that data sets on to future 
steps in the same job. The most common scenario is an IDCAMS DEFINE 
(e.g., for an SMP/E CSI) followed by a batch job step that references 
the just-created data set via JCL (e.g., EXEC PGM=GIMSMP). The same 
issue occurs with batch TSO/E XMIT steps, FTP, etc. This is a 
well-known, decades old restriction in JES3 and the workarounds are 
tried and true: either a) insert a single, non-executing INFORMJ3 step 
at the start of the job that pretends to allocate all of the 
"troublesome" data sets or b) split the job into multiple jobs and use 
DJC to coordinate them. We use DJC heavily, but tend to use the INFORMJ3 
step approach to solve the specific issue under discussion.. For example:


//INFORMJ3 EXEC PGM=ABEND806,COND=ONLY
//PFIMSTR  DD DISP=(,CATLG),DSN=EJES.PRODGEN.EJESMSTR.PFI
//NETDATA  DD DISP=(,CATLG),DSN=EJES.PRODGEN.EJESMSTR.NETDATA
//PACKAGE  DD DISP=(,CATLG),DSN=EJES.PRODGEN.PACKAGE

This restriction has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with COND= or 
IF/THEN/ELSE.


--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: SYSIN in PROC -- technique

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Wed, 4 Sep 2013 11:27:32 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:

>on 09/03/2013 at 07:30 PM, Paul Gilmartin said:
>
>>It's logically impossible for JES3 setup to exploit or even
>>accommodate the newer features of JCL, even dating back to
>>IF...THEN...ELSE...ENDIF.
>
>Nonsense.
> 
OK.  At least extraordinarily cumbersome.  Consider:
...
//  IF some-condition THEN
//LARGEEXEC PGM=IEFBR14
//SYSUT1  DD  DISP=(,CATLG),DSN=FOO.BAR,UNIT=SYSALLDA,SPACE=(1000,1000)
//  ELSE
//SMALLEXEC PGM=IEFBR14
//SYSUT1  DD  DISP=(,CATLG),DSN=FOO.BAR,UNIT=SYSALLDA,SPACE=(1000,10)
//  ENDIF

Works in JES2; fails allocation setup in JES3.  Can be repaired by the
Byzantine circumvention of adding a dummy step with COND=(0,LE)
which appears (in setup's myopic view) to DELETE data set FOO.BAR.

JES3 setup assumes every step will be executed, even those that are
logically mutually exclusive, such as by ELSE or COND=(0,LE).

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: SYSIN in PROC -- technique

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <1001144189627242.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu>, on
09/03/2013
   at 07:30 PM, Paul Gilmartin  said:

>It's logically impossible for JES3 setup to exploit or even
>accommodate the newer features of JCL, even dating back to
>IF...THEN...ELSE...ENDIF.

Nonsense.

-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 Atid/2
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: SYSIN in PROC -- technique

[Victor Gil]

But &SYSPARM can be passed to Assembler from any JES:

//
//* SUBSTITUTE VARIABLES BY ASSEMBLING 'PUNCH &SYSPARM' in 
x.TEST.SOURCE(PARMTODD)  
//
// SET PPP=
//ASM   EXEC PGM=ASMA90,PARM=('SYSPARM(&PPP)')
//SYSIN  DD  DSN=x.TEST.SOURCE(PARMTODD),DISP=SHR 
//SYSUT1DD  SPACE=(4096,(2,2)),UNIT=VIO
//SYSLIB DD  DSN=SYS1.MACLIB,DISP=SHR   
//SYSPRINT DD  SYSOUT=*   
//SYSLIN DD  UNIT=VIO,DISP=(,PASS),SPACE=(TRK,(1,1)),
//  DCB=(BLKSIZE=80,LRECL=80,RECFM=FB)  
//...
//*next Step SYSIN
SYSINDD DISP=(OLD,DELETE),DSN=*.ASM.SYSLIN 


HTH,
-Victor-

===
Be aware, use of system symbols in JCL is supported in JES2 in z/OS 2.1, NOT 
JES3.

Sean M. Smith
OSS Program Products




From:   Paul Gilmartin 
To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu, 
Date:   08/04/2013 03:09 PM
Subject:    SYSIN in PROC -- technique
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List 

I just discovered I can do such as:

//SOURCE   PROC
//CEXEC  PGM=ASMA90
//SYSIN DD   *  For caller to override.
//  DD   *  Main body of code
 MACRO
TESTIT   CSECT
 ...
 END
// PEND

... and the caller can (optionally) provide an overriding prelude SYSIN 
containing various ACONTROL and SETC instructions to govern the rest of the 
processing.  Could be very useful for storing tailorable SYSIN in a PROCLIB.

Will be even better with symbol substitution in 2.1.

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: SYSIN in PROC -- technique

[Peter Sylvester]

On 09/04/2013 03:03 PM, Tom Marchant wrote:

On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 19:30:28 -0500, Paul Gilmartin wrote:


upgrade to JES2.

I have worked in a shop that had both JES2 and JES3 and I appreciated
some of the things that I could do easily on JES3 that were difficult or
impossible on JES2.  For example, Dependent Job Control (DJC) networks.
There were some who wanted to convert to JES2, but the shop was to
dependent on JES3 facilities.


Once upon a time there was a product "Chained Jobs Scheduling" from IBM,
a small subsystem interfaces through SMF exits that provided DJC.

It had a little control dataset whose layout, i.e how many records by track,
was calculated "by hand"; during a conversion from 3380 to 3390 disks
I had a few minutes to fix that, fortunately full source (which I still have)
but unfortunately copyrighted.

Still a nice piece of code.

Peter Sylvester

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: SYSIN in PROC -- technique

[Tom Marchant]

On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 19:30:28 -0500, Paul Gilmartin wrote:

>upgrade to JES2.

I have worked in a shop that had both JES2 and JES3 and I appreciated 
some of the things that I could do easily on JES3 that were difficult or 
impossible on JES2.  For example, Dependent Job Control (DJC) networks. 
There were some who wanted to convert to JES2, but the shop was to 
dependent on JES3 facilities.

-- 
Tom Marchant

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Who is Lagging Whom? (Was: SYSIN in PROC -- technique)

[efinnell15]

Eddie Stanky once got ejected for taking three smokin fast ball strikes from 
Bob Feller wheeled around and said 'Mr. Ump that last one sounded high!' I 
though that went away when they move CI back to MVS? 



In a message dated 09/04/13 02:24:00 Central Daylight Time, 
edja...@phoenixsoftware.com writes:
forth. I have tried ALL of these new capabilities and am very pleased to 
see that our JES2 users no longer must wait for a job to get into an 
initiator just to detect a simple JCL spelling error such as 
DISP=(NEW,CATLF). Took 'em long enough... ;) 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Who is Lagging Whom? (Was: SYSIN in PROC -- technique)

[Ed Jaffe]

On 9/3/2013 3:15 PM, Clark Morris wrote:

On 3 Sep 2013 12:42:25 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:


Be aware, use of system symbols in JCL is supported in JES2 in z/OS 2.1, NOT 
JES3.

Another example of where the more expensive JES lags its cheaper
brother.


That cuts both ways...

It's true that IBM's new JESx function deployment pattern, for as many 
years as I can remember, has been to add function to JES2 in one 
release, let them shake out the problems, and then add the capability to 
JES3 in the next release e.g., WLM-managed initiators, scheduling 
environments, NJE over TCP/IP, etc. Bob Rogers once joked, in an OS/390 
Goody Bag at SHARE, that there was only one JES development team that 
ping-ponged back and forth, from one release to the next, between the 
JESes. :D


As the early exploiter, sometimes JES2 gets it wrong and must go back 
and redesign things after the JES3 deployment. A good example was 
WLM-managed initiator balancing in z/OS 1.8 JES2 which came out at least 
a decade after JES3's WLM initiator support--which was balanced right 
from the start.


z/OS 1.13 JES2 allowed in-stream data in JCL procedures are now that 
capability exists in z/OS 2.1 JES3. As a follow-on, z/OS 2.1 JES2 
supports in-stream symbols and so we expect the historic trend to 
continue...


We also now see JES2 starting to acquire function that has been in JES3 
for decades, such as eight-character job class names, job class groups, 
system-name job routing, pre-execution converter/interpreter, and so 
forth. I have tried ALL of these new capabilities and am very pleased to 
see that our JES2 users no longer must wait for a job to get into an 
initiator just to detect a simple JCL spelling error such as 
DISP=(NEW,CATLF). Took 'em long enough... ;)


--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: SYSIN in PROC -- technique

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 19:42:16 +, Smith, Sean M wrote:

>Be aware, use of system symbols in JCL is supported in JES2 in z/OS 2.1, NOT 
>JES3.
> 
Another good reason to upgrade to JES2.

It's logically impossible for JES3 setup to exploit or even accommodate the
newer features of JCL, even dating back to IF...THEN...ELSE...ENDIF.

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: SYSIN in PROC -- technique

[Clark Morris]

On 3 Sep 2013 12:42:25 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:

>Be aware, use of system symbols in JCL is supported in JES2 in z/OS 2.1, NOT 
>JES3.

Another example of where the more expensive JES lags its cheaper
brother.

Clark Morris
>
>Sean M. Smith
>OSS Program Products
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
>Behalf Of Martin Packer
>Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2013 11:15 AM
>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>Subject: Re: SYSIN in PROC -- technique
>
>Yes, that would be a Release 13 thing. And yes my October residency will 
>explore some of the value of this and, particularly, the 2.1 enhancements
>- for job cloning.
>
>Cheers, Martin
>
>Martin Packer,
>zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of 
>Excellence, IBM
>
>+44-7802-245-584
>
>email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com
>
>Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker
>Blog: 
>https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker
>
>
>
>From:   Paul Gilmartin 
>To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu, 
>Date:   08/04/2013 03:09 PM
>Subject:SYSIN in PROC -- technique
>Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
>
>
>
>I just discovered I can do such as:
>
>//SOURCE   PROC
>//CEXEC  PGM=ASMA90
>//SYSIN DD   *  For caller to override.
>//  DD   *  Main body of code
> MACRO
>TESTIT   CSECT
> ...
> END
>// PEND
>
>... and the caller can (optionally) provide an overriding prelude SYSIN 
>containing various ACONTROL and SETC instructions to govern the rest of the 
>processing.  Could be very useful for storing tailorable SYSIN in a PROCLIB.
>
>Will be even better with symbol substitution in 2.1.
>
>-- gil
>
>--
>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
>lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Unless stated otherwise above:
>IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
>741598. 
>Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
>
>
>
>
>
>
>--
>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
>--
>This message, and any attachments, is for the intended recipient(s) only, may 
>contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or proprietary and 
>subject to important terms and conditions available at 
>http://www.bankofamerica.com/emaildisclaimer.   If you are not the intended 
>recipient, please delete this message.
>
>--
>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: SYSIN in PROC -- technique

[Smith, Sean M]

Be aware, use of system symbols in JCL is supported in JES2 in z/OS 2.1, NOT 
JES3.

Sean M. Smith
OSS Program Products


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Martin Packer
Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2013 11:15 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: SYSIN in PROC -- technique

Yes, that would be a Release 13 thing. And yes my October residency will 
explore some of the value of this and, particularly, the 2.1 enhancements
- for job cloning.

Cheers, Martin

Martin Packer,
zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of 
Excellence, IBM

+44-7802-245-584

email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com

Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker
Blog: 
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker



From:   Paul Gilmartin 
To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu, 
Date:   08/04/2013 03:09 PM
Subject:SYSIN in PROC -- technique
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List 



I just discovered I can do such as:

//SOURCE   PROC
//CEXEC  PGM=ASMA90
//SYSIN DD   *  For caller to override.
//  DD   *  Main body of code
 MACRO
TESTIT   CSECT
 ...
 END
// PEND

... and the caller can (optionally) provide an overriding prelude SYSIN 
containing various ACONTROL and SETC instructions to govern the rest of the 
processing.  Could be very useful for storing tailorable SYSIN in a PROCLIB.

Will be even better with symbol substitution in 2.1.

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN








Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU






--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
This message, and any attachments, is for the intended recipient(s) only, may 
contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or proprietary and 
subject to important terms and conditions available at 
http://www.bankofamerica.com/emaildisclaimer.   If you are not the intended 
recipient, please delete this message.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: SYSIN in PROC -- technique

[Martin Packer]

Yes, and I've no idea now whether the OP is JES2 or JES3.

Cheers, Martin

Martin Packer,
zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator,
Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM

+44-7802-245-584

email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com

Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker
Blog: 
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker



From:   "Smith, Sean M" 
To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu, 
Date:   09/03/2013 08:42 PM
Subject:        Re: SYSIN in PROC -- technique
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List 



Be aware, use of system symbols in JCL is supported in JES2 in z/OS 2.1, 
NOT JES3.

Sean M. Smith
OSS Program Products


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
Behalf Of Martin Packer
Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2013 11:15 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: SYSIN in PROC -- technique

Yes, that would be a Release 13 thing. And yes my October residency will 
explore some of the value of this and, particularly, the 2.1 enhancements
- for job cloning.

Cheers, Martin

Martin Packer,
zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of 
Excellence, IBM

+44-7802-245-584

email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com

Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker
Blog: 
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker



From:   Paul Gilmartin 
To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu, 
Date:   08/04/2013 03:09 PM
Subject:    SYSIN in PROC -- technique
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List 



I just discovered I can do such as:

//SOURCE   PROC
//CEXEC  PGM=ASMA90
//SYSIN DD   *  For caller to override.
//  DD   *  Main body of code
 MACRO
TESTIT   CSECT
 ...
 END
// PEND

... and the caller can (optionally) provide an overriding prelude SYSIN 
containing various ACONTROL and SETC instructions to govern the rest of 
the processing.  Could be very useful for storing tailorable SYSIN in a 
PROCLIB.

Will be even better with symbol substitution in 2.1.

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email 
to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN








Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU






--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
This message, and any attachments, is for the intended recipient(s) only, 
may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or 
proprietary and subject to important terms and conditions available at 
http://www.bankofamerica.com/emaildisclaimer.   If you are not the 
intended recipient, please delete this message.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN








Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU






--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: SYSIN in PROC -- technique

[Martin Packer]

Yes, that would be a Release 13 thing. And yes my October residency will 
explore some of the value of this and, particularly, the 2.1 enhancements 
- for job cloning.

Cheers, Martin

Martin Packer,
zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator,
Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM

+44-7802-245-584

email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com

Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker
Blog: 
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker



From:   Paul Gilmartin 
To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu, 
Date:   08/04/2013 03:09 PM
Subject:SYSIN in PROC -- technique
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List 



I just discovered I can do such as:

//SOURCE   PROC
//CEXEC  PGM=ASMA90
//SYSIN DD   *  For caller to override.
//  DD   *  Main body of code
 MACRO
TESTIT   CSECT
 ...
 END
// PEND

... and the caller can (optionally) provide an overriding
prelude SYSIN containing various ACONTROL and SETC
instructions to govern the rest of the processing.  Could
be very useful for storing tailorable SYSIN in a PROCLIB.

Will be even better with symbol substitution in 2.1.

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN








Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU






--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

SYSIN in PROC -- technique

[Paul Gilmartin]

I just discovered I can do such as:

//SOURCE   PROC
//CEXEC  PGM=ASMA90
//SYSIN DD   *  For caller to override.
//  DD   *  Main body of code
 MACRO
TESTIT   CSECT
 ...
 END
// PEND

... and the caller can (optionally) provide an overriding
prelude SYSIN containing various ACONTROL and SETC
instructions to govern the rest of the processing.  Could
be very useful for storing tailorable SYSIN in a PROCLIB.

Will be even better with symbol substitution in 2.1.

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN