Re: Molly Malone (was:RE: Set numbers off permanently.)

In , on 09/03/2010 at 07:24 AM, "McKown, John" said: >http://www.lyricstime.com/allan-sherman-shticks-of-one-kind-and-half-a-dozen-of-the-other-lyrics.html Thanks. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see We d

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

010m.html#84 Set numbers off permanently aka one of the issues with adding new features was that the development and other product costs had to be covered by revenue flow ... this could be fudged some by combining different products in the same group and calculating revenue againnst costs at the

Re: Molly Malone (was:RE: Set numbers off permanently.)

> -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of McKown, John > > > -Original Message- > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > > [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) > > > > I thought that I knew the entire Allan Sherman oeuvr

Molly Malone (was:RE: Set numbers off permanently.)

> -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) > Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2010 7:41 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu > Subject: Re: Set numbers off permanently. > > In > , >

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

In , on 09/02/2010 at 06:36 AM, "Chase, John" said: >Hmmm Not quite Allan Sherman's version :-) I thought that I knew the entire Allan Sherman oeuvre; what did he do to "Mollie Malone"? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

In , on 09/02/2010 at 07:00 AM, "Chase, John" said: >ISTR that "PDF" (now ISPF option 2) was the full-screen editor; an >add-on to "SPF". First, there was no PDF until the name changed to Interactive System Productivity Facility; prior versions of SPF, under whatever name, included the editor

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

In <77142d37c0c3c34da0d7b1da7d7ca343c69...@nwt-s-mbx1.rocketsoftware.com>, on 09/02/2010 at 12:17 AM, Bill Fairchild said: >Native TSO itself had barely crawled out of the primordial ooze in >the early 1970s. A lot happened in the middle 1970's. >And the only thing supported in full-screen

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

In , on 09/01/2010 at 08:40 PM, J R said: >Maybe I'm misremembering but I'm sure I was using SPF, not ISPF, in >or around 1974 -- and that *was* developed within IBM. New version of same product, just as z/OS is still MVS. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO posit

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

In , on 09/01/2010 at 06:30 PM, zMan said: >I was giving it a few years -- it has evolved a TINY bit. Yes. In fact, it's evolved a TINY bit in the 2000's. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see We don't care

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

Thursday, September 02, 2010 5:06 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: Set numbers off permanently. Very interesting. I started around 1979 with SPF. I remember having a hard time getting it to work right, mostly because my 3277 terminal had only 5 PFKeys. When I figured out that I should s

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

Very interesting. I started around 1979 with SPF. I remember having a hard time getting it to work right, mostly because my 3277 terminal had only 5 PFKeys. When I figured out that I should set PF4 & PF5 to scroll down and up, it got a lot easier. -- Eric Bielefeld Systems Programmer

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

John Chase remembers: > ISTR that "PDF" (now ISPF option 2) was the full-screen editor; > an add-on to "SPF". The full-screen editor, formerly called SPF (the "Structured Programming Facility") was incorporated into ISPF (renamed by then, twice, to "Interactive System Productivity Facility") as

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 08:00 -0400, Chase, John wrote: > ISTR that "PDF" (now ISPF option 2) was the full-screen editor; an > add-on to "SPF". The original "Structured Programming Facility" (which had nothing to do with structured programming, a buzzword of the day) became the "Interactive System P

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 07:05 -0400, William H. Blair wrote: > 1983. It also went OCO. That was particularly painful to us at > the time because we had made mods to SPF (source) that obviously > could not be carried forward. We had to drop them and completely > revise our source library management ap

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

bi...@mainstar.com (Bill Fairchild) writes: > I was writing about the prevalence of TSO and ISPF, not their exact > birthdates. I should have made that clearer in my previous post. old references to why VM370 performance products and ISPF development were merged into the same group (also referenc

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

> -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of William H. Blair > > J R notes: > > > Maybe I'm misremembering but I'm sure I was using SPF, not ISPF, > > in or around 1974 -- and that *was* developed within IBM. > > Yes. SPF was developed by IBM and used internal

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

> -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) > > That's what I call a "Mollie Malone": > > She died of a faever > from which none could save her > and that was the end of sweet Mollie Malone Hmmm Not quite Allan Sher

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

, September 01, 2010 7:41 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: Set numbers off permanently. Maybe I'm misremembering but I'm sure I was using SPF, not ISPF, in or around 1974 -- and that *was* developed within IBM.

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

J R notes: > Maybe I'm misremembering but I'm sure I was using SPF, not ISPF, > in or around 1974 -- and that *was* developed within IBM. Yes. SPF was developed by IBM and used internally for a couple of years before it was released as a program product in 1976. Tom Simpson and Dr. Mark Mergen

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

>I remember, in 1981, it was still called SPF. The name changed in the mid 1980's, IIRC. - I'm a SuperHero with neither powers, nor motivation! Kimota! -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

Maybe I'm misremembering but I'm sure I was using SPF, not ISPF, in or around 1974 -- and that *was* developed within IBM. > Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 00:17:07 + > From: bi...@mainstar.com > Subject: Re: Set numbers off permanently. > To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu >

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2010 4:34 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: Set numbers off permanently. In , on 08/31/2010 at 08:57 PM, zMan said: >Because ISPF is 1980s technology?

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 6:10 PM, William H. Blair wrote: > It would, in fact, be 1976, to be specific about it. I was giving it a few years -- it has evolved a TINY bit. -- zMan -- "I've got a mainframe and I'm not afraid to use it" ---

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

| >Because ISPF is 1980s technology? | | ITYM 1970's. It would, in fact, be 1976, to be specific about it. -- WB -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the mes

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

In , on 08/31/2010 at 08:57 PM, zMan said: >Because ISPF is 1980s technology? ITYM 1970's. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

In , on 08/31/2010 at 04:51 PM, Paul Gilmartin said: >It's only trying to help you. That's what I call a "Mollie Malone": She died of a faever from which none could save her and that was the end of sweet Mollie Malone We all know what is paved with good intentions. --

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 8:55 PM, Clark Morris wrote: > If we can be prompted on a delete, why can't we have an installation > or user setting that prompts us every time ISPF insists on turning on > or off something line NUM, CAPS or RECOVERY? Because ISPF is 1980s technology? (Sorry, you asked!)

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

On 31 Aug 2010 11:31:36 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote: >Does anybody know of a way to prevent the following from happening when >setting numbers off? Short of going into every member of a PDS I have >not found a way to prevent this. We have tried profile lock and a >number of other t

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

>CAPS ON is the very worst, because it so easily destroys data. Only if you're not aware. Any line you don't edit retains its case. - I'm a SuperHero with neither powers, nor motivation! Kimota! -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signo

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

On Tue, 31 Aug 2010 14:58:59 -0400, Tony Harminc wrote: >On 31 August 2010 14:39, Pinnacle wrote: >> - Original Message - From: "Benik, John E" > >>> Does anybody know of a way to prevent the following from happening when >>> setting numbers off?  Short of going into every member of a PDS

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

On 31 August 2010 14:39, Pinnacle wrote: > - Original Message - From: "Benik, John E" >> Does anybody know of a way to prevent the following from happening when >> setting numbers off?  Short of going into every member of a PDS I have >> not found a way to prevent this.  We have tried pr

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

>If you want to suppress this for all time, create an IMACRO to do this: >NUM ON >UNNUM >NUM OFF NOT a good idea if there is valid data in the columns which hold statement numbers. You should first check the mode, and just issue the NUM OFF. - I'm a SuperHero with neither powers, nor motivatio

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

>Does anybody know of a way to prevent the following from happening when >setting numbers off? I've done it with an initial EDIT MACRO. Within that, if numbers are on, turn them off. I forget the exact ISREDIT query/sub-command, but there is one that will tell you about numbers. - I'm a SuperHe

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

10 13:30:29 -0500 > From: john_e_be...@uhc.com > Subject: Set numbers off permanently. > To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu > > Does anybody know of a way to prevent the following from happening when > setting numbers off? Short of going into every member of a PDS I have > not found a

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

- Original Message - From: "Benik, John E" Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2010 2:31 PM Subject: Set numbers off permanently. Does anybody know of a way to prevent the following from happening when setting numbers off? Short of going into every

Re: Set numbers off permanently.

The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Benik, John E > Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2010 1:30 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu > Subject: Set numbers off perm

Set numbers off permanently.

Does anybody know of a way to prevent the following from happening when setting numbers off? Short of going into every member of a PDS I have not found a way to prevent this. We have tried profile lock and a number of other things without success. -CAUTION- Profile changed to NUMBER ON STD (fro