On 29/01/2021 2:21 am, Lionel Dyck wrote:
Good point that I missed in the doc - catch 22 isn't it. Too bad IBM doesn't
include the REXX compiler (and TSO Pipes) with z/OS by default
I found a problem with the compiled REXX runtime memory allocation. It
uses GETMAIN and not cell pools and
On 1/28/21 7:03 PM, Seymour J Metz wrote:
Thanks. I have a few questions:
1 Do you supported tagged addresses, e.g., foo+*@domain
all going to foo's inbox.
Can you reject anything to foo@domain, i.e., without a plus tag?
YES, VERP addresses are supported.
2. Do you have
> Does that also work at the next level of stem variables?
There is no "level of stem variables".
> Userid = "FTPD"
> IsStepInit.Userid. = "0"
"FTPD." is the tail. The stem end at the first period.
If you could get IBM to port OOREXX to TSO then you would be able to have stem
variables whose
Well phooey!
Thanks,
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of turgut kalfaoglu
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2021 9:20 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Rexx stem variable question
Charles -- it only works
On 1/29/21 1:00 AM, Tony Harminc wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jan 2021 at 13:21, Lionel Dyck wrote:
Good point that I missed in the doc - catch 22 isn't it. Too bad IBM
doesn't include the REXX compiler (and TSO Pipes) with z/OS by default
Licensing the Rexx compiler used to cost as much as a
Charles -- it only works for the first level.. The global
initialization that is..
a. = 0
works, but
a.b. = 0
does not work..
-turgut
On 1/29/21 7:58 AM, Charles Mills wrote:
I either have a misunderstanding of how stem variables work - or perhaps it
is just some stupid program bug.
I
I either have a misunderstanding of how stem variables work - or perhaps it
is just some stupid program bug.
I know this basic drill on stem variables: I can say foo. = "bar" and then
the value of foo.anything is effectively "bar".
Does that also work at the next level of stem variables?
On 29/01/2021 4:40 am, Bob Bridges wrote:
I didn't bother to reply to Mr Crayford's post; he seems to be saying that
he encounters no editing task nowadays that he can't do just as well
manually as if he wrote an editing program. I can't take that seriously.
(No offense intended; I may have
Hi Paul,
Sorry for the late getting back to this List. Let me get you some of those at
this moment. Will get you all later this week.
1) there is JES MAS in that CEC sharing 5 lpars but no change needed in JES
Exits at this moment
2) We will stop auto routing commands to removing lpar(s)
3)
My *recollection* is that with CONDENSE
1. You lose a lot of the CPU time that you gained from compiling because the
executable has to un-CONDENSE itself; and
2. It is not NSA-level encryption. It is no huge trick to recover the source
code.
I seem to recall that I decided that it was not
Ah, memories! I still have my copy of P J Brown's book around here somewhere.
Seminal work.
I was not aware of Prof. Cole's book, thanks for the link.
Peter
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Jeremy Nicoll
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2021 5:48 PM
On Thu, 28 Jan 2021, at 22:21, Seymour J Metz wrote:
> The term macro has been used for programs called from within the
> assembler since the 1950s, and the generated text was rescanned. In the
> TSO world, edit macros written in CLIST are subject to controlled
> rescans while edit macros
Well, TECO was the original platform for Emacs, back in the day.
I started with cards; even Wordstar was more user friendly. Of course, by the
time I was forced to use Wordstar I had already been exposed to better editors.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
Typically people call a program a script when it issues a lot of host commands
and is interpreted rather than running from a compiled and linked executable.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
On Thu, 28 Jan 2021, at 19:44, Jeremy Nicoll wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Jan 2021, at 07:58, David Crayford wrote:
> > I think your the one missing the point. I can't remember the last time I
> > had to write a macro as I can do the things I need just using commands.
>
> I used Xedit (with macros I
I don't recall KEDIT being unacceptably slow, just missing some features of
XEDIT. I still believe that it was a good choice for that particular project.
My PC editor of choice, TSPF, could run contemporaneous edit macros and ISPF
dialogs that didn't rely on MVS-only services. Could you tell
Isn't that a long winder subject?
In preparation for shutting down my z/OS 2.3 system, sometime this year, I
am looking at options for unloading/storing both my z/OS files as well as my
application data and infrastructure files.
I thought of experimenting with GIMZIP. Which, for a PDS/E
The term macro has been used for programs called from within the assembler
since the 1950s, and the generated text was rescanned. In the TSO world, edit
macros written in CLIST are subject to controlled rescans while edit macros
written in REXX are not.
There's a lot more to the history than
On Jan 28, 2021, at 1:25 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:
>
> This is fascinating, and not a little disturbing. I have long understood
> that keyboard shortcuts that save me immense quantities of time won't help a
> coworker who won't take the time to learn them deep down, simply because he
> has to
On Thu, 28 Jan 2021, at 20:21, Seymour J Metz wrote:
> KEXX? When I used KEDIT I found KEXX under powered for anything but key
> binding; KEDIT supported Quercus REXX, so I was home free. I just wish
> that KEDIT had been a larger subset of XEDIT, e.g., SET PENDING.
>
> Fortunately most of my
On Thu, 28 Jan 2021, at 20:40, Bob Bridges wrote:
> By the way, what in y'all's opinion is the proper use of the word "macro"?
The classic computer science meaning is explained at:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macro_(computer_science)
- it's where one character sequence is detected in a file
On Thu, 28 Jan 2021 at 13:21, Lionel Dyck wrote:
> Good point that I missed in the doc - catch 22 isn't it. Too bad IBM
> doesn't include the REXX compiler (and TSO Pipes) with z/OS by default
>
What's your hurry - we've only been asking for around 20 years now!
Tony H.
On Thu, 28 Jan 2021 at 15:40, Bob Bridges wrote:
> By the way, what in y'all's opinion is the proper use of the word "macro"?
> I hear the term "Excel macro" all the time, for example, but how is it not,
> simply, a program? My own idea (not worth very much, but it is my own) is
> that a macro
COND(ence) allows you to have the source code embedded in the executable
with all goodis that comes with it, without making the code visible.
NOTRACE, will disable traces (incase the user hits attention).
My two cents (Israeli Shekel)
ITschak
*| **Itschak Mugzach | Director | SecuriTeam Software
> Mr Crayford's post; he seems to be saying that
> he encounters no editing task nowadays that he can't do
> just as well manually as if he wrote an editing program.
More than that; he seems to be saying that nobody else has legitimate reasons
for writing edit macros.
> By the way, what in
I didn't bother to reply to Mr Crayford's post; he seems to be saying that
he encounters no editing task nowadays that he can't do just as well
manually as if he wrote an editing program. I can't take that seriously.
(No offense intended; I may have misunderstood.)
Mr Nicoll got me thinking
Doing meaningful comparisons of languages is hard; there are a lot of variables
to take into account, e.g., what finger macros do your users have. For the
comparison to be generally applicabler you need a large enough sample so you
can analyze the effect of each independent variable with a
KEXX? When I used KEDIT I found KEXX under powered for anything but key
binding; KEDIT supported Quercus REXX, so I was home free. I just wish that
KEDIT had been a larger subset of XEDIT, e.g., SET PENDING.
Fortunately most of my XEDIT scripts were after REXX came along, and I didn't
have to
On Thu, 28 Jan 2021, at 07:58, David Crayford wrote:
> I think your the one missing the point. I can't remember the last time I
> had to write a macro as I can do the things I need just using commands.
I used Xedit (with macros I wrote in EXEC or EXEC 2) for a few years in the
1980s, then moved
I've seen blind people be very productive with a keyboard. Mouse? No.
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021, 06:25 Bob Bridges wrote:
> This is fascinating, and not a little disturbing. I have long understood
> that keyboard shortcuts that save me immense quantities of time won't help
> a coworker who won't
This is fascinating, and not a little disturbing. I have long understood that
keyboard shortcuts that save me immense quantities of time won't help a
coworker who won't take the time to learn them deep down, simply because he has
to stop and think about what key sequence is the next step,
On Thu, 28 Jan 2021 10:18:55 -0800, Charles Mills wrote:
>
>But NOSLINE disables SOURCELINE and full Rexx TRACE, and more importantly
>prevents execution with the alternate library, that is, prevents execution
>unless the target system licenses (pays for) the full library.
>
Providing a strong
These questions are left as an exercise for the student.
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2021 10:30 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: REXX Compiler
On
On Thu, 28 Jan 2021 10:04:01 -0800, Charles Mills wrote:
>@Gil: yes. 100% support for every standard Rexx feature, plus support for
>%INCLUDE, which is really useful for breaking up a huge program.
>
I understand INTERPRET came along later; the initial announcement excluded it.
ADDRESS with
Good point that I missed in the doc - catch 22 isn't it. Too bad IBM doesn't
include the REXX compiler (and TSO Pipes) with z/OS by default
Lionel B. Dyck <
Website: https://www.lbdsoftware.com
"Worry more about your character than your reputation. Character is what you
are, reputation
Good point that I missed in the doc - catch 22 isn't it. Too bad IBM doesn't
include the REXX compiler (and TSO Pipes) with z/OS by default
_
Lionel B. Dyck
Senior Software Engineer
21st Century Software
940 West Valley Road
Ah! Right you are.
But NOSLINE disables SOURCELINE and full Rexx TRACE, and more importantly
prevents execution with the alternate library, that is, prevents execution
unless the target system licenses (pays for) the full library.
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe
There are two compiler options in the IBM Compiler - SLINE and NOSLINE - use of
NOSLINE will prevent the sourcelines from being included in the load module.
Lionel B. Dyck <
Website: https://www.lbdsoftware.com
"Worry more about your character than your reputation. Character is what you
are,
All this is reminding me repeatedly of the time I spent learning, and
eventually writing edit macros in, TECO, the singularly unintuitive text
editor on the DECsystem-10. Not that I'm moaning for it to come back...but
it was unexpectedly handy once I learned its ins and outs.
---
Bob Bridges,
@Gil: yes. 100% support for every standard Rexx feature, plus support for
%INCLUDE, which is really useful for breaking up a huge program.
I have a lot of experience with the Rexx compiler. I can affirm 100% of what
@Mark, @Lionel and @Peter write. Your Rexx code will almost certainly run
On Thu, 28 Jan 2021 17:30:18 +, Gadi Ben-Avi wrote:
>
>I was asked to investigate a REXX compiler.
>
>I found the IBM REXX Compiler and a product called eXtended Compiler for REXX
>from a company called improvIT Software Innovations?.
>
>The main goal is to make REXX programs run faster.
>
The IBM Rexx compiler at least does compile your script to the internal
tokenized format that the Rexx interpreter actually executes, so running a
"compiled" script avoids the overhead of translation to that internal format.
That isn't a lot of help for single-level scripts, but if you have a
The compiler will help to a limited degree. Your REXX code will run faster
but most REXX invokes outside services (e.g., TSO commands, ISPF services,
etc.) and those will not benefit from the compiler. Thus the usual caveat of
YMMV applies.
Lionel B. Dyck <
Website: https://www.lbdsoftware.com
The combination of the IBM REXX compiler and the REXX Library provide for
faster execution of complied REXX programs. Without the REXX Library, using the
Alternate Library for REXX, compiled REXX programs execute at the speed of
interpreted REXX.
Mark Jacobs
Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based
Hi,
I was asked to investigate a REXX compiler.
I found the IBM REXX Compiler and a product called eXtended Compiler for REXX
from a company called improvIT Software Innovations?.
The main goal is to make REXX programs run faster.
Do these products help with that, or are they just a way to
I use TSPF for serious edits, but I use kate and notepad for trivial edits.
I'll probably wind up learning emacs in Linux unless I find something I like
better.
Under TSPF I copy rectangular blocks quite often, and find the trackball to be
quite natural for that purpose. OTOH, I do a lot of
On Thu, 28 Jan 2021 10:04:18 -0600, Joel C. Ewing wrote:
>...
>The worst of both worlds is a process that can only be done by a
>combination of mouse clicks and keyboard entry where a good typist must
>continually shift mouse hand between mouse and keyboard. Make that a
>repetitive process
Depends heavily on the editor software. One editor I remember trying (I don't
remember which one now) used Ctrl-left-click to start and end a block copy.
Quite easy to use, one hand for the mouse and one for the Ctrl key, then Ctrl-C
or -X then Ctrl-V to copy/cut and paste.
Sometimes
You have to carve the bird at the joints. How about a comparison of block copy
using keyboard versus mouse?
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Pew, Curtis G
Sent: Thursday,
On Jan 28, 2021, at 10:04 AM, Joel C. Ewing wrote:
>
> I would be willing to bet the the stopwatch studies cited were based on
> a highly restricted cases.
The context was comparing command-key sequences to clicking buttons or
selecting menu items. Remembering the command-key sequence takes as
On Jan 28, 2021, at 9:41 AM, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>
> What tasks were they measuring? I suspect that with a good interface the
> keyboard is more productive for some tasks and the mouse more productive for
> others.
>
The linked article does include an exception:
“And, in fact, I find
Yes, tagged addresses can be very useful, both for filtering into task-specific
inboxes and for detecting when a vendor is selling your addresses to spammers.
While the use of "+" for this purpose is most common, some providers use "-"
and less common characters, e.g., "{". Be aware that there
I would be willing to bet the the stopwatch studies cited were based on
a highly restricted cases. A mouse is best where mouse movement is
limited to short moves with relatively large icons or menu selections as
a target, and where no significant data entry is required. Long mouse
moves
Thanks. I have a few questions:
1 Do you supported tagged addresses, e.g., foo+*@domain
all going to foo's inbox.
Can you reject anything to foo@domain, i.e., without a plus tag?
2. Do you have aggressive spam filtering in the SMTP session?
3. What user options do you offer for
What tasks were they measuring? I suspect that with a good interface the
keyboard is more productive for some tasks and the mouse more productive for
others.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
Do you always patronize those who disagree with you?
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
David Crayford
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2021 10:07 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
The storage group name is assigned by the storage group ACS routine. RMM
appends the storage group name to the mount message and updates the Load
Display to use the storage group name. This allows you to have different ranges
of tape volumes for each storage group, i.e., the storage groups
Do you do much coding these days? Or do you just pontificate on mailing lists ;)
> On 28 Jan 2021, at 11:01 pm, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>
> What you believe has no relation to reallity. Maybe the built-in commands of
> your editor are sufficient for your needs, or maybe you have more tolerance
What you believe has no relation to reallity. Maybe the built-in commands of
your editor are sufficient for your needs, or maybe you have more tolerance for
reptitive tasks than I, but others have more stringent requirements. No editor
has built-in commands for everything a user might want to
I tried to get back to a mainframe job for several years with no luck. I
think the head hunter must have been paid for applicants, not hires.
My experience is several years out of date now, I think we shutdown on Z/OS
1.8 or so. At this point, I can coast to the retirement exit as a Linux
admin
Most recruiters are as dumb as a sack of rocks, and I don't want to insult the
rocks.
There are too many Indian recruiters chasing too few people. Have started
playing hardball with them
Followed by hanging up on them
Steve
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
On Jan 27, 2021, at 7:08 PM, David Crayford wrote:
>
> Because using a mouse is a productivity killer!
>
Is it?
“We’ve done a cool $50 million of R & D on the Apple Human Interface. We
discovered, among other things, two pertinent facts:
• Test subjects consistently report that
On 1/26/2021 9:46 PM, Ravi Kumar.C.Gowda wrote:
Dear IBM team, can you please share the link where blogs & videos regarding
zOSMF are posted!? Much appreciated
Start here: https://ibm.github.io/zOSMF/
Kurt Quackenbush -- IBM, SMP/E Development
Chuck Norris never uses CHECK when he applies
Well, I would be happy to provide you with email accounts and domains on
my server, just pick a hosting package from kalfaoglu.net.
Being a fellow mainframe lover, (my HNET address is TURGUT AT TRVM1) I
would love to assist.
Email me (or TELL me) for more assistance.
Regards,
Turgut
64 matches
Mail list logo
