On 8 November 2012 18:33, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>> ... I can't think of strong
>> able to make changes to the current level). I can't think of strong
>> enough punishment for those who came up with the idea to manually put
>> a "change history" in the source code which normally makes it
>> compl
On Nov 8, 2012, at 09:14, Rob van der Heij wrote:
>
> One of the virtues of CMS UPDATE is that you can actually have
> different code streams share the updates, as long as they don't bite
> each other (like when you work on a new major release, still being
> able to make changes to the current leve
On 8 November 2012 15:41, Ray Mansell wrote:
> In addition to IEBUPDTE, you should include z/VM, where XEDIT and the
> CMS UPDATE command also make use of sequence numbers.
>
> Several decades ago, I wrote a code development library system based
> around these commands, and z/VM development still
From: "Thomas Berg"
Who dropped the deck ?
Randy did... It was Friday late afternoon. Randy was in a rush to leave. He
was already late and his project was late. He dropped a nearly full tray,
close to 2000 cards of COBOL source decks, laced with compile, link, data
generator and exec JCL. This
In addition to IEBUPDTE, you should include z/VM, where XEDIT and the
CMS UPDATE command also make use of sequence numbers.
Several decades ago, I wrote a code development library system based
around these commands, and z/VM development still uses similar
technology to develop and maintain the pr
On Nov 8, 2012, at 03:45, Sharuff Morsa3 wrote:
> Sequence numbers is one of those topics where opinions divide. HLASM -
> written in HLASM, has had their sequence numbers stripped and stored in
> UTF8 on a Jazz server. We use RTC and Jazz for HLASM. Its an integrated
> system - source control a
Sequence numbers is one of those topics where opinions divide. HLASM -
written in HLASM, has had their sequence numbers stripped and stored in
UTF8 on a Jazz server. We use RTC and Jazz for HLASM. Its an integrated
system - source control and project management, all together in RTC. Not
only int
november 2012 22:42
Till: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Ämne: Re: Use of "sequence numbering" in current HLASM source?
I would prefer the 083 sorter.
Nothing made me appreciate computers and mag tape so much as sorting 6 million
cards on 12 columns, the first of which was alphanu
on
11/07/2012 12:06:13 PM:
> From: "McKown, John"
> To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU,
> Date: 11/07/2012 12:19 PM
> Subject: Re: Use of "sequence numbering" in current HLASM source?
> Sent by: IBM Mainframe Assembler List
>
> What! You don't have
There are some reasons, albeit llittle known, to keep line numbers:
1. With STATS and NUM on, ISPF edit stores the edit session number in
79-80. It's the same as the MM of VV.MM column in the ISPF member
list. This information is useful in edit, browse, and compiler/assembly
listings
So, in summary, use them or not as the individual or company dictates. I don't
really lose any capability by keeping my source as I do, without sequence
numbers.
Thanks to all. It was interesting to read that some still do have a use for
these.
--
John McKown
Systems Engineer IV
IT
Administra
On 11/7/2012 10:21 AM, McKown, John wrote:
So, other than being "non main stream" and even "obsessively weird",
is there any *technical* reason to maintain sequence numbers?
I think this is another "religious" issue not worth fighting over.
Some programs are maintained with strict sequence num
EMBLER-
> l...@listserv.uga.edu] On Behalf Of John Gilmore
> Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 10:09 AM
> To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Use of "sequence numbering" in current HLASM source?
>
> I have not used sequence numbers, CAPS ON, and the
For all types that I retrieve from Endevor (cobol asm macro copybook jcl
proc parm ...) 73-80 is worse than useless. The first thing I do when the
element is in my library is to do REN;UNNUM to eliminate them.
If they exist and if you use ISPF edit and if you have no bnds (and in
some cases if yo
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 10:21 AM, McKown, John wrote:
> <...snip...>
>
> So, other than being "non main stream" and even "obsessively weird", is
> there any *technical* reason to maintain sequence numbers?
>
> --
> John McKown
> Systems Engineer IV
> IT
>
>
John,
We use sequence numbers to extrac
I have not used sequence numbers, CAPS ON, and the like for many years.
Those who have sentimental attachments to things of this sort---old
habits die hard in some bailiwicks---are and should be free to use
them.
Specious arguments for their continued use are, of course, easy to
construct; but ev
On 11/7/2012 7:21 AM, McKown, John wrote:
So, other than being "non main stream" and even "obsessively weird", is there
any *technical* reason to maintain sequence numbers?
We got rid of sequence numbers in the majority of our HLASM source code long
ago. Only source code that is distributed to
SSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Use of "sequence numbering" in current HLASM source?
I know where our "love" of putting sequence numbers in columns 73-80 comes
from. But the only thing that I know of that continues to really use them is
IEBUPDTE. So I'm wondering if i
On Nov 7, 2012, at 08:21, McKown, John wrote:
> I know where our "love" of putting sequence numbers in columns 73-80 comes
> from. But the only thing that I know of that continues to really use them is
> IEBUPDTE. ...
>
> So, other than being "non main stream" and even "obsessively weird", is th
I know where our "love" of putting sequence numbers in columns 73-80 comes
from. But the only thing that I know of that continues to really use them is
IEBUPDTE. So I'm wondering if it is really worth the bother to have them
anymore. Now, most here would likely say "what bother? ISPF makes it ea
20 matches
Mail list logo
