Jon Brock wrote:
Unique message identifiers are a wonderful thing. I still don't know why their
use isn't more widespread. Too much trouble, maybe?
It is not unique to IBM. Novell Netware had such messages, and Messages
and Codes book. However it didn't cover 100% of the messages. I found
On Apr 7, 2006, at 2:54 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
Irony noted.
OTOH, the availability of M&C should not be used to excuse,
as IBM too often does, message texts that are obscure,
inadequate, misleading, or just plain wrong.
Gil,
And don't forget the COBOL people have stated that a M&C for CO
y, April 07, 2006 3:54 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Messages and Codes (was WLM)
>
>
> In a recent note, McKown, John said:
>
> > Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 13:52:55 -0500
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: IBM Mainfra
In a recent note, McKown, John said:
> Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 13:52:55 -0500
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jon Brock
> >
> > Unique message identifiers are a wonderful thing. I still
> > don't know why
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jon Brock
> Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 1:24 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Messages and Codes (was WLM)
>
>
> Unique message identifiers are
Unique message identifiers are a wonderful thing. I still don't know why their
use isn't more widespread. Too much trouble, maybe?
Jon
I absolutely agree with Radoslaw. People from other platforms have no idea
there are books covering all possible messages. Concept of unique message
identif
I absolutely agree with Radoslaw. People from other platforms have no idea
there are books covering all possible messages. Concept of unique message
identificator is unknown to them. When I teach new people for z/OS it is
second thing I tell them. First one is that it helps to remember numbers
(339
7 matches
Mail list logo
