Re: Is there a correspondence between 64-bit IBM mainframes and PoOps editions levels?

2012-10-07 Thread John Gilmore
I am familiar with C++ templates. I said C, not C++ with all its baggage. But enough! Have fun! Make as many debater's points as you like. Perhaps you can work in the dawn horse, eohippus, too. I shall not comment further. --jg On 10/7/12, Charles Mills wrote: > Are you familiar with C++ te

IEW2763S

2012-10-07 Thread Paul Gilmartin
I'm trying to use a UNIX (USS) directory (actually NFS mounted) for Binder input. In some cases it works well; in others where I see no apparent differences other than the pathname I get: IEW2763S DE07 FILE ASSOCIATED WITH DDNAME LIB001 CANNOT BE OPENED BECAUSE THE FILE DOES NOT EXIST OR CANNOT

Re: Zero length records outlawed! (Again.)

2012-10-07 Thread Paul Gilmartin
On Sun, 7 Oct 2012 17:10:16 -0400, Gerhard Postpischil wrote: > >I just ran a series of tests, writing a VB data set, then a VBS >data set, with various data lengths from 0 to 20, once with move >mode and once with locate. All ran fine. Then I ran analogous >tests reading the data sets, and dumping

Re: Is there a correspondence between 64-bit IBM mainframes and PoOps editions levels?

2012-10-07 Thread Charles Mills
Are you familiar with C++ templates? One could define, and some compiler vendor libraries define, functions which work as you describe. -- Sent from my mobile phone. Please excuse my brevity. Charles John Gilmore wrote: I am familiar with the inline option. What it does is not what I had in mi

Re: Is there a correspondence between 64-bit IBM mainframes and PoOps editions levels?

2012-10-07 Thread John Gilmore
I am familiar with the inline option. What it does is not what I had in mind. I should have been more specific. I meant independent C implementations. IBM C and IBM PL/I share the same optimizing and code-generation machinery. A [simple] mathematical example will make the appropriate distincti

Re: Zero length records outlawed! (Again.)

2012-10-07 Thread Gerhard Postpischil
On 10/7/2012 11:45 AM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: Note that in <20121005215823.eaa21f58...@smtp.patriot.net> I wrote "SC26-7410-09, the 1.11 version of DFSMS Using Data Sets, still gives the minimum length of an SDW as 5. However, it does not explicitly say whether the RDW or SDW limit appli

Re: SMP/E question

2012-10-07 Thread Jeremy Nicoll - ls mainframes
Skip Robinson wrote: > Whether or not you include GOUPEXTEND to pick up additional PTFs to > resolve hold errors, I feel strongly that the real APPLY should encompass > exactly the same selection of sysmods as the corresponding CHECK. I submit > my real APPLY via SDSF SJ with CHECK commented out.

Re: Is there a correspondence between 64-bit IBM mainframes and PoOps editions levels?

2012-10-07 Thread Anne & Lynn Wheeler
paulgboul...@aim.com (Paul Gilmartin) writes: > CSC? CDC? yep cdc, fingerslip -- virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970 -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send

Re: SMP/E question

2012-10-07 Thread Skip Robinson
Whether or not you include GOUPEXTEND to pick up additional PTFs to resolve hold errors, I feel strongly that the real APPLY should encompass exactly the same selection of sysmods as the corresponding CHECK. I submit my real APPLY via SDSF SJ with CHECK commented out. As for HOLD data, we have

Re: SMP/E question

2012-10-07 Thread Gibney, Dave
Coincidentally, it's about 20 years since the upgrade I got bit on. Much of the blood, sweat etc that Skip describes happened in those 20 years. I agree with both Skip and Ed that SMP/E will do all the checking for you. Last time I did this, I still did the iterative runs of check until I got a

Re: SMP/E question

2012-10-07 Thread Jeremy Nicoll - ls mainframes
Skip Robinson wrote: > While Ed and I differ on the need for CHECK and on the practice of > injecting maintenance directly into the body of a running system, we agree > on the pointlessness of chasing down sysmod error chains. It's abiut 20 years since I last did this. IIRC there's some operand

Re: Is there a correspondence between 64-bit IBM mainframes and PoOps editions levels?

2012-10-07 Thread Charles Mills
C/C++ inlines apparent external functions frequently. You can ask the compiler to inline user-written functions. See the inline keyword. -- Sent from my mobile phone. Please excuse my brevity. Charles John Gilmore wrote: It would be possible to become angry about Shmuel's literalisms, selectiv

Re: SMP/E question

2012-10-07 Thread Skip Robinson
While Ed and I differ on the need for CHECK and on the practice of injecting maintenance directly into the body of a running system, we agree on the pointlessness of chasing down sysmod error chains. SMP/E is designed--at some considerable cost in blood, sweat, and tears--*not* to install any s

Re: Is there a correspondence between 64-bit IBM mainframes and PoOps editions levels?

2012-10-07 Thread John Gilmore
It would be possible to become angry about Shmuel's literalisms, selective quotations, context mixing and switching, and the like. It would even be possible to enter into protracted disputes about them with him, as I used to do too often. I no longer judge it worthwhile to do this. His gadfly po

Re: Is there a correspondence between 64-bit IBM mainframes and PoOps editions levels?

2012-10-07 Thread Paul Gilmartin
On Sun, 7 Oct 2012 12:13:29 -0400, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: > >as the vm370 group on the 3rd flr expanded ... they outgrew the space >and moved out to the old SBC building in burlington mall (SBC having >been transferred to CSC as part of settling some litigation). also as > CSC? CDC? >part of

Re: Is there a correspondence between 64-bit IBM mainframes and PoOps editions levels?

2012-10-07 Thread Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
In , on 10/06/2012 at 04:49 PM, John Gilmore said: >BIF has come to be the generic term, but the same notion has been >given different names in different statement-level procedural >languages. COBOL, for example, calls them intrinsic functions. >The idea is an important one. None of us want

Re: Zero length records outlawed! (Again.)

2012-10-07 Thread Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
In <50706996.8050...@valley.net>, on 10/06/2012 at 01:25 PM, Gerhard Postpischil said: >Perhaps I'm missing something, but hex 0004 defines a null >record in V, VB, and VBS. VBS runs fine without segment descriptor >bits. Note that in <20121005215823.eaa21f58...@smtp.patriot.net> I wrote

Re: Is there a correspondence between 64-bit IBM mainframes and PoOps editions levels?

2012-10-07 Thread Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
In , on 10/06/2012 at 08:49 AM, John Gilmore said: >and he at once quite correct and utterly wrong. As usual, it depends >upon what "was available" is thought to mean. : Available describes someone or something that can be found, used or access

Re: Is there a correspondence between 64-bit IBM mainframes and PoOps editions levels?

2012-10-07 Thread Anne & Lynn Wheeler
shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net (Shmuel Metz , Seymour J.) writes: > Every generation believes that it invented sex. The 4300 may mark > MVCIN becoming standard, but the instruction is much older than the > 4300. The Technion had it on their 370/165 in 1972, and I believe that > it was available on th

Re: SMP/E question

2012-10-07 Thread Jeremy Nicoll - ls mainframes
Edward Jaffe wrote: > As a part-time sysprog, I abbreviate your approach even more. I have no > time for pesky 'CHECK' operations. Do you chase down the prereq/coreq chains by hand then? -- Jeremy C B Nicoll - my opinions are my own. ---

Re: Is there a correspondence between 64-bit IBM mainframes and PoOps editions levels?

2012-10-07 Thread zMan
On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 8:18 AM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) < shmuel+...@patriot.net> wrote: > That doesn't suggest that it wasn't available on a 360/50, just that > your installation wasn't aware of it or wasn't willing to pay for it. Nor does it prove it was. What's your point? Oh, right, you don

Re: SMP/E question

2012-10-07 Thread Edward Jaffe
On 10/7/2012 3:33 AM, Gibney, Dave wrote: I learned the hard way. It was the first upgrade I was part of, I came in in the middle and they were cutting corners applying to the live system. It really breaks when the attempt to apply a PTF to IEBCOPY blows space in LINKLIB and retry attempts to

Re: Is there a correspondence between 64-bit IBM mainframes and PoOps editions levels?

2012-10-07 Thread Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
In <20121006090110.e889233...@panix2.panix.com>, on 10/06/2012 at 05:01 AM, Randy Hudson said: >I don't believe MVCIN was available on the 360/50; we used the TR >instruction to reverse fields, or otherwise re-arrange them. That doesn't suggest that it wasn't available on a 360/50, just that

Re: Has anyone taken out hardware support for z196 from anyone other than IBM

2012-10-07 Thread R.S.
W dniu 2012-10-04 13:44, Bruno Sugliani pisze: On Thu, 4 Oct 2012 05:16:02 -0500, Mike Schwab wrote: I thought it was a 3 year minimum. Its only been out for 2 years. -- Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? Nope ..1 year for CPU and generall

Re: SMP/E question

2012-10-07 Thread Gibney, Dave
I learned the hard way. It was the first upgrade I was part of, I came in in the middle and they were cutting corners applying to the live system. It really breaks when the attempt to apply a PTF to IEBCOPY blows space in LINKLIB and retry attempts to use the partially done copy of IEBCOPY to co