On Sun, 16 Apr 2017 09:14:01 +0200, Peter Hunkeler wrote:
>
>
>While I made this up, I have a hard time to imagine it did not happen that
>way. How else would can explain the weird logic behind COND= ?
>
Assembler mentality. It's the CC mask for a BC to branch around the next step.
>But then
Sounds like a CONd job to me
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Peter Hunkeler
Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2017 3:14 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [IBM-MAIN] AW: Re: How can I set Non-zero return code in DFSORT
> Why not just invert the COND= for the additional processing step?
> Instead of COND=(0,EQ,DFSORT), code COND=(0,NE,DFSORT)?
Back in the days when the need JCL was designed, people recognized the need for
conditional execution of a job step. However, it was already late in the
afternoon,
