I've a REXX subroutine that uses DFSORT (or is it SYNCSORT?) to sort the
stack, but this is easier. But it's gonna work only if I have at least a
UID and GID, right?
---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313
/* It is always the right time to do the right thing. -Martin Luther Ki
>> It's unusual, having to add an un-necessary line split just to add a
>> comment. I was expecting it to work more like IDCAMS, TSO or JCL.
What is stopping you from doing coding like this?
//TOOLIN DD *
* Enter ICETOOL operators here *
* COPY INPUTA TO OUTA
COPY FROM(INPUTA) TO(OUTA)
*
You wrote: I had the remarks/comments after the Continuation character (-).
Sure enough, when I did that, it worked.
It's unusual, having to add an un-necessary line split just to add a comment. I
was expecting it to work more like IDCAMS, TSO or JCL.
I searched for every # in the the DFSOR
Thanks Michael for the example and the documentation link. All this is good to
know.
Peter
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Schmitt, Michael
Sent: Thursday, March 7, 2024 6:12 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: How to call zEDC functions from an HLL other than C
Last y
I really have to fix the title...
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>> That is good news, but I cannot seem to replicate your results.
Bob,
If you noticed my example job keenly, I had the remarks/comments after the
Continuation character (-).Btw TOOLIN statements are self-explanatory. You
adding the remarks is kind of repeating the statements once again
Ei
Last year I asked how you can call zEDC functions from a high-level language
other than C. The point was that the Callable Service for High Level Language
manual says you can use it from COBOL, but there's no information how to do it.
Peter Farley posted that IBM provides a sample of a COBOL pro
That is good news, but I cannot seem to replicate your results
ICE281I 0 ORIGINAL OPERATOR STATEMENTS FOLLOW
* Enter ICETOOL operators here *
COPY FROM(INPUTA) TO(OUTA) # COPY INPUTA TO O
I was on bitsavers, so I looked.I thought I remembered that the old Sort/Merge
program supported comments on the control cards. See pages 11 and 12.
http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/ibm/360/os/R01-08/C28-6543-2_Sort_Merge_Apr66.pdf
I'm sure that DFSORT would have always accepted any valid Sort/Merge
Sorry, I didn't see Sri's remarks (no pun intended) until after I had replied.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Pommier, Rex
Sent: Thursday, March 7, 2024 3:59 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Line comments in DFSORT
Actually it
Actually it is documented. They're just not called comments. Look up "remark"
in the DFSort application programming guide.
Rex
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Bob
Stark
Sent: Thursday, March 7, 2024 2:03 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [EXT
>> Alas, ICETOOL does not support the same kind of comments.
Bob,
Not sure what you meant by that. ICETOOL statements TOOLIN and XXXCNTL do
support comments. Here is an example.
//STEP0100 EXEC PGM=ICETOOL
//TOOLMSG DD SYSOUT=*
//DFSMSG DD SYSOUT=*
//IN DD *
ABC
DEF
//CTL1OUT DD SYS
Thanks. That online doc is tricky, I read the detail page which didn't mention
"Remarks". The higher level page that you shared did mention them.
I experimented with our legacy system, and it supported them too (but was
missing other features like OUTREC).
Alas, ICETOOL does not support the sam
>> I just did an experiment in DFSORT with JCL-style line comments after
>> INCLUDE, SORT, and OUTREC, and they work!
The DFSORT doc says that comments are only supported when entered with * on
column 1.
Bob,
Of course, they work as you entered a REMARKS.
Remark Field : This field can contain
I just did an experiment in DFSORT with JCL-style line comments after INCLUDE,
SORT, and OUTREC, and they work!
The DFSORT doc says that comments are only supported when entered with * on
column 1.
When was this implemented, and why isn’t this documented? Do you think it is
safe to rely on?
Fully off topic however this is to help the guys in the US
I have been beat to death will emails and calls looking for me
To do contract work.
I have told the Indian recruiters I no longer will accept contract
Jobs. And I give then my permanent price.
I would suggest that all US base
Here’s the problem. When you “secure” the mainframe with LESS SECURE platforms,
you actually open yourself up to hacks. Splunk has been hacked quite
frequently.
https://www.securityweek.com/high-severity-vulnerability-patched-in-splunk-enterprise/amp/
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
On Th
/* REXX */
stdin.0=5
stdin.1="KIJJ"
stdin.2="KQWR"
stdin.3="ADGF"
stdin.4="OEPE"
stdin.5="VNVV"
cmd="sort"
call bpxwunix cmd,stdin.,stdout.,stderr.
Steve
--
For IBM-MAIN s
Yes, that is exactly my impression. I have not run exhaustive experiments but I
think that is it. Yes, for reasons related to other logic, this program
contains Index. = "" but Sri's and my previous successful use of BPXWUNIX sort
do not.
CM
On Thu, 7 Mar 2024 17:17:23 +, Jeremy Nicoll
w
On Thu, 7 Mar 2024, at 16:54, Charles Mills wrote:
> Thank you! THAT is the clue I needed. I need to quote the stem names.
> Passing plain Index. passes "", the value of Index., to sort.
So... the difference between your code & Sri's is that you'd
initialised index. = "" whereas his didn't ha
Thank you! THAT is the clue I needed. I need to quote the stem names. Passing
plain Index. passes "", the value of Index., to sort.
Problem solved. Thanks all.
CM
On Thu, 7 Mar 2024 16:22:02 +, Alan Young wrote:
>I think I have always used the position specification format. In a couple of
I think I have always used the position specification format. In a couple of
processes I ran before, I have
xrc = BPXWUNIX("/bin/sort -bdu -k1.1,1.11 ","pl.","pls.")
xrc = BPXWUNIX("/bin/sort -bd -k1.10,1.26 -k2.1,2.8","d.","ds.")
Maybe sort is aborting with a return code (RC, retval, etc.) and
Well sure, over-reliance on any one "solution" as a panacea is foolish.
I had prospects tell me "we don't have any security issues -- we have RACF."
CM
On Thu, 7 Mar 2024 02:08:26 +, kekronbekron
wrote:
>> You are making a mistake if you discount the effectiveness of
>> industry-standard
Thanks all. The mystery deepens.
Using the same stem variable should not be the problem. I have done that before
successfully, and the sort command documentation talks about how it uses a
temporary file to avoid clobbering the input data if the files are the same.
BUT ... changing to a differen
Not the question you asked, but...
sort_stem = 'index.'
call sort 6, ???(see comments after code)
/* Sort sort_stem using combsort */
sort: procedure,
expose (sort_stem)
arg key_start, key_length
size = value(sort_stem'0')
gap = size
do until switches = 0 & gap = 1
gap
Awesome, I know & do tell you directly that you're doing excellent & needed
work like zOS-ifying distributed tools.
On Thursday, March 7th, 2024 at 15:08, David Crayford
<0595a051454b-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> > On 7 Mar 2024, at 10:08 am, kekronbekron
> > 02dee3fcae33-
> On 7 Mar 2024, at 10:08 am, kekronbekron
> <02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>
>> You are making a mistake if you discount the effectiveness of
>> industry-standard tools in analyzing mainframe data.
>
> Let me clarify... I'm not saying don't use it at all. Just saying t
Restarting the computer solved the problem.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
ITschak Mugzach
Sent: יום ה 07 מרץ 2024 09:00
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: PCOM Question
[You don't often get email from 05a7ced721d8-dmarc-requ...@listserv.
28 matches
Mail list logo
