Re: OT STCK question

In <20150617214111.5353554.62004.40...@yahoo.ca>, on 06/17/2015 at 05:41 PM, Ted MacNEIL said: >The only reason for they (singular) is for formal documentation and >the press. ... >But, it's all for the sake of political correctness. Nonsense. They (singular) was around centuries before PC

Re: OT STCK question

On Fri, 19 Jun 2015 11:23:54 -0400, Gary Weinhold wrote: > From conversations with a child who prefers not to be identified by >gender and who also studied lingustics, I suspect that just as all the >rules I learned about when to use "me" and "I" seem to be ignored when >"and" is used ("John and

Re: OT STCK question

From conversations with a child who prefers not to be identified by gender and who also studied lingustics, I suspect that just as all the rules I learned about when to use "me" and "I" seem to be ignored when "and" is used ("John and me will be using the tickets given to Nancy and I") that "th

Re: OT STCK question

Behalf Of Robert A. Rosenberg Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2015 3:24 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: OT STCK question At 06:59 -0500 on 06/18/2015, Tom Marchant wrote about Re: OT STCK question: >On Wed, 17 Jun 2015 20:03:01 -0400, Robert A. Rosenberg wrote: > > >The pro

Re: OT STCK question

At 06:59 -0500 on 06/18/2015, Tom Marchant wrote about Re: OT STCK question: On Wed, 17 Jun 2015 20:03:01 -0400, Robert A. Rosenberg wrote: >The problem is that there is no gender neutral/un-specified singular. We have "it", but we don't like to refer to people as "

Re: OT STCK question

On Wed, 17 Jun 2015 20:03:01 -0400, Robert A. Rosenberg wrote: >The problem is that there is no gender neutral/un-specified singular. We have "it", but we don't like to refer to people as "it". In many languages every object has a gender and there is a masculine and feminine "the" to go with it

Re: OT STCK question

ONE -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: OT STCK question

At 22:23 + on 06/17/2015, J O Skip Robinson wrote about Re: OT STCK question: The he/she/they conundrum in English is just another flavor of the same problem. Once we commit to the sex of a pronoun, it's hard to use it for the opposite gender, even to the point where we give into n

Re: OT STCK question

..@sce.com -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Tom Brennan Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2015 2:19 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: OT STCK question My wife is from a country where the same word is used for both

Re: OT STCK question

UA.EDU Reply To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List Subject: Re: OT STCK question Aw geez, where's Gilmore when we need him? On 6/17/2015 3:48 PM, Ted MacNEIL wrote: > It's generally for generic usage. > It's okay when used colloquially, ie: > Pat enjoys a drink when he&#x

Re: OT STCK question

So instead of he,she, it. We'd have ze,ze,zitback to work knaves! In a message dated 6/17/2015 4:18:45 P.M. Central Daylight Time, t...@tombrennansoftware.com writes: because it sounds like we're talking about two separate people. So I vote for a new word, and that would solve the Ca

Re: OT STCK question

My wife is from a country where the same word is used for both he and she. I've heard translations like, "A man came into the store today, and she complained about the service". I have to stop for a second because it sounds like we're talking about two separate people. So I vote for a new wo

Re: OT STCK question

to straw-person arguments. - -teD - Original Message From: Paul Gilmartin Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2015 16:31 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Reply To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List Subject: Re: OT STCK question On Mon, 15 Jun 2015 19:30:26 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: If "they&

Re: OT STCK question

ne 17, 2015 16:31 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Reply To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List Subject: Re: OT STCK question On Mon, 15 Jun 2015 19:30:26 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: > >>If "they" is newly to assume a singular meaning, > >Newly? That ship sailed before or

Re: OT STCK question

Well we could produce a new word. Maybe: ze, zey, zer, zoo.Leave it as an exercise for the reader-past pluperfect subjunctive! In a message dated 6/17/2015 3:31:50 P.M. Central Daylight Time, 000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu writes: "Pat tells me that they enjoy a glas

Re: OT STCK question

On Mon, 15 Jun 2015 19:30:26 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: > >>If "they" is newly to assume a singular meaning, > >Newly? That ship sailed before or grandfathers were born. > No, it's dragging its anchor most uncomfortably: "Pat tells me that they enjoy a glass of wine with their me

Re: STCK question

In <022001d0a6d6$3459fff0$9d0dffd0$@mcn.org>, on 06/14/2015 at 12:13 PM, Charles Mills said: >Leap seconds are irrelevant. No. They're irrelevant if you just do the arithmetic yourself, but they're highly relevant when you use a clock conversion routine that takes them into account. >The TOD

Re: OT STCK question

In <3077152189307302.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu>, on 06/15/2015 at 10:30 AM, Paul Gilmartin <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> said: >If "they" is newly to assume a singular meaning, Newly? That ship sailed before or grandfathers were born. -- Shmuel (Seymour

Re: STCK question

At 10:49 -0500 on 06/15/2015, Paul Gilmartin wrote about Re: STCK question: I'll grant that I hijacked the topic by introducing the legal consequences of calendar dates. But "well under a year" is irrelevant. Adding a mere 60 seconds to 2008-12-31 23:59:00 should give a date

Re: STCK question

On Mon, 15 Jun 2015 08:29:12 -0700, Charles Mills wrote: >But there are no dates or years in the question, only duration. And the >durations are by implication well under a year. > I'll grant that I hijacked the topic by introducing the legal consequences of calendar dates. But "well under a ye

Re: STCK question

: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: STCK question On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 12:13:31 -0700, Charles Mills wrote: >Leap seconds are irrelevant. Let's say the routine being measured took >86,710 seconds. You would be completely correct in saying it took 1 >day, 5 minutes and 10 seconds e

Re: OT STCK question

On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 17:44:20 +, J O Skip Robinson wrote: >I should let this go, but Sunday is still Friday in the mind. > >Number agreement is based on subject - predicate. That is, subject (noun, >pronoun) should be consistent with its associated verb. Whether a pronoun and >its associated

Re: STCK question

On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 12:13:31 -0700, Charles Mills wrote: >Leap seconds are irrelevant. Let's say the routine being measured took >86,710 seconds. You would be completely correct in saying it took 1 day, 5 >minutes and 10 seconds even if the run happened to span a midnight at which >a leap second w

Re: OT STCK question

> The Hebrew Bible goes back farther. You probably meant "further".;-) === > Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2015 17:17:03 -0400 > From: shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net > Subject: Re: OT STCK question > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > > In > , > on 06/14/2015 >

Re: OT STCK question

In , on 06/14/2015 at 05:54 PM, J O Skip Robinson said: >How's that for pedigree? The Hebrew Bible goes back farther. O r were you only looking at English? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see We don't car

Re: STCK question

ubject: Re: STCK question In , on 06/12/2015 at 06:10 PM, J R said: >If the highest unit you are working toward is "days", it's actually >quite simple to calculate. That's because you don't have to deal with >months and years of

Re: OT STCK question

rogram Co-Manager 626-302-7535 Office 323-715-0595 Mobile jo.skip.robin...@sce.com -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2015 5:56 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: O

Re: OT STCK question

com -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 3:11 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: OT STCK question On 2015-06-12 15:57, J O Skip Robinson wrote: > I suggest that anyone matricu

Re: STCK question

In , on 06/12/2015 at 06:10 PM, J R said: >If the highest unit you are working toward is "days", it's actually >quite simple to calculate. That's because you don't have to deal >with months and years of differing lengths. What about leap seconds? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg

Re: STCK question

In <201506122210.t5cma5pg008...@d03av01.boulder.ibm.com>, on 06/12/2015 at 05:05 PM, Wayne Driscoll said: >Define a constant representing the number of time units in one day You can't; it's a time-dependent variable. The problem is leap seconds. OTOH, the OP may be satisifed with a fairly g

Re: OT STCK question

In , on 06/12/2015 at 05:31 PM, J O Skip Robinson said: >I have no problem with 'they/them' as genderless generic pronouns. That's good, because the usage goes back hundreds of years. OTOH, I cringe when I hear "media is" or, worse, "medias are". >But failure of number agreement is linguisti

Re: STCK question

division? quOtient in the Odd register; rEmainder in the Even register.) Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Janet Graff Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 7:40 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: STCK question

Re: OT STCK question

> -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On > Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin > Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 3:11 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: OT STCK question > > On 2015-06-12 15:57, J O Skip Robin

Re: OT STCK question

On 12 June 2015 at 18:10, Paul Gilmartin < 000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > On 2015-06-12 15:57, J O Skip Robinson wrote: > > I suggest that anyone matriculating at a US university not try to get > away with 'they is' on a placement exam. (S)he will find theirself in > Bone

Re: STCK question

On 12 June 2015 at 10:39, Janet Graff < 004dc9e91b6d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > STCK-STCK difference in times since the start of the started task > + 1972/01/01 add in base STCK time to get a STCK value again > STCKCONV convert that to DATE=MMDD TIME=DEC

Re: OT STCK question

On 2015-06-12 15:57, J O Skip Robinson wrote: > I suggest that anyone matriculating at a US university not try to get away > with 'they is' on a placement exam. (S)he will find theirself in Bonehead > English. > And yet, "A person who uses that construct should know that they are destined for B

Re: STCK question

=== > Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 09:39:38 -0500 > From: 004dc9e91b6d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu > Subject: Re: STCK question > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > > As these things go, I have found new uses for my little routine. It's strong > enough to find the elapsed time fo

Re: STCK question

erv.ua.edu> > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Date: 06/12/2015 09:39 AM > Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] STCK question > Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > > As these things go, I have found new uses for my little routine. > It's strong enough to find the elapsed time for

Re: OT STCK question

535 Office 323-715-0595 Mobile jo.skip.robin...@sce.com -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 11:44 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: OT STCK question Canada and the US: two

Re: STCK question

+002 Further if you have any questions please let me know Thanks. Sri Hari Kolusu DFSORT Development IBM Corporation From: Janet Graff <004dc9e91b6d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 06/12/2015 07:39 AM Subject: Re: STCK question Sent

Re: STCK question

At 10:03 -0500 on 06/12/2015, Mike Schwab wrote about Re: STCK question: > I can calculate the date difference by hand (in C based off of the character representation of the date) of course. Unless someone knows of a nifty method to get the elapsed number of days from the data that I h

Re: STCK question

In <1938152255023757.wa.janet.graffyahoo@listserv.ua.edu>, on 06/11/2015 at 06:56 PM, Janet Graff <004dc9e91b6d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> said: >But I'm missing something. Significance start character. You mightnalso like EDMK. BTW, the code might be faster using a register pair

Re: OT STCK question

Canada and the US: two countries separated by a common language. - -teD -   Original Message   From: J O Skip Robinson Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 14:21 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Reply To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List Subject: Re: OT STCK question My head is about to explode. In US English

Re: OT STCK question

-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Robert A. Rosenberg Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 7:37 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: OT STCK question At 11:19 -0500 on 06/11/2015, Paul Gilmartin wrote about Re: OT STCK quest

Re: STCK question

On 12 June 2015 at 10:39, Janet Graff < 004dc9e91b6d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > Unless someone knows of a nifty method to get the elapsed number of days > from the data that I have? Paging Mr. Gilmore... Tony H. -

Re: STCK question

At 09:39 -0500 on 06/12/2015, Janet Graff wrote about Re: STCK question: I can calculate the date difference by hand (in C based off of the character representation of the date) of course. Unless someone knows of a nifty method to get the elapsed number of days from the data that I have? I

Re: STCK question

On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Janet Graff <004dc9e91b6d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > As these things go, I have found new uses for my little routine. It's strong > enough to find the elapsed time for larger numbers than I intended. So much > so, I thought I'd add a function to

Re: STCK question

At 08:47 -0500 on 06/12/2015, Elardus Engelbrecht wrote about Re: STCK question: Another very kind person told me of this very clever method of commenting, ie. you make unreadable things sort of readable: Use these equates in Assembler: b equ x'40' z equ x'20' n

Re: STCK question

At 05:37 -0500 on 06/12/2015, Elardus Engelbrecht wrote about Re: STCK question: Robert A. Rosenberg wrote: Another method is to use an * Comment to show the mapping. * B Z Z 9 . 9 9 - MASK5 DCX'402021204B202060'BZZ9.99- I hate comments

Re: OT STCK question

At 11:19 -0500 on 06/11/2015, Paul Gilmartin wrote about Re: OT STCK question: On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 10:47:39 -0500, Mike Schwab wrote: I use they all the time as the genderless pronoun. A supervisor suggested he, I changed it to (s)he. Of course, like all pronouns, it should assimilate its

Re: STCK question

As these things go, I have found new uses for my little routine. It's strong enough to find the elapsed time for larger numbers than I intended. So much so, I thought I'd add a function to show the elapsed time since the beginning of my started task. The time is working wonderfully but when I

Re: STCK question

Elardus Engelbrecht wrote: >>Another method is to use an * Comment to show the mapping. >>* B Z Z 9 . 9 9 - >>MASK5 DCX'402021204B202060' BZZ9.99- >I hate comments - they're only for lame newbies and are not needed because >they make debugging too easy [1] ...

Re: STCK question

Robert A. Rosenberg wrote: >Another method is to use an * Comment to show the mapping. >* B Z Z 9 . 9 9 - >MASK5 DCX'402021204B202060' BZZ9.99- I hate comments - they're only for lame newbies and are not needed because they make debugging too easy [1] ... ;-D

Re: STCK question

At 17:26 -0700 on 06/11/2015, Lizette Koehler wrote about Re: STCK question: And from another sample I found searching on EDIT MASK ASSEMBLER INSTRUCTION To simplify maintenance of the program, I like to "document" the print masks by showing a character representation of the hex fi

Re: OT STCK question

I don't know about politically correct. But, it is recommended in the Canadian Press Book of Style. - -teD -   Original Message   From: Paul Gilmartin Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 18:11 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Reply To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List Subject: Re: OT STCK question On Th

Re: STCK question

Thank you Charles, both were excellent suggestions that worked wonderfully! Janet -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: STCK question

X'5C2021204B2020'***9.99 Lizette > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] > On Behalf Of Janet Graff > Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 4:57 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > S

Re: STCK question

LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: STCK question > > Ooh I am liking the ED instruction. But I'm missing something. > > My pattern is this > > =XL15'20207A20207A20204B202020202020' > > My data is this > > =XL8'00308208' > > And

Re: STCK question

riginal Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Janet Graff Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 4:57 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: STCK question Ooh I am liking the ED instruction. But I'm missing something. My pattern is this =

Re: STCK question

ou want the first leading zero. Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Janet Graff Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 4:57 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: STCK question Ooh I am liking the ED instruction. But I&#x

Re: STCK question

Ooh I am liking the ED instruction. But I'm missing something. My pattern is this =XL15'20207A20207A20204B202020202020' My data is this =XL8'00308208' And the result I'm getting is this ' 308208' What I want is this ' 0.308208' What can I do to the pattern mask to fo

Re: OT STCK question

In , on 06/11/2015 at 10:47 AM, Mike Schwab said: >I use they all the time as the genderless pronoun. That would be he in contemporary English, but they has long antecedents. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see

Re: OT STCK question

On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 10:47:39 -0500, Mike Schwab wrote: >I use they all the time as the genderless pronoun. A supervisor >suggested he, I changed it to (s)he. > Of course, like all pronouns, it should assimilate its number, singular, from its antecedent. A form both politically and gramatically

Re: OT STCK question

difficult to get used to, at first. > > - > -teD > - > Original Message > From: Elardus Engelbrecht > Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 10:46 > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Reply To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > Subject: Re: STCK question > > John McKown w

Re: STCK question

John McKown wrote: >​The "s" is optional, not the "he". I guess the real regexp should be \bs?he\b >. \b matches, but does not consume, a "word separator" character. So, that >would be "word separator", followed by an optional "s", followed by "he", >followed by a "word_separator".​ Thanks. I'

Re: OT STCK question

frame Discussion List Subject: Re: STCK question John McKown wrote: >> I've seen s/he used to cover both genders. >​Well, being computer professionals, despite not being of the UNIX variety, >perhaps we use use the regular expression: s?he​ >​(the ? means "repeat 0 or 1

Re: STCK question

On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 9:28 AM, Elardus Engelbrecht < elardus.engelbre...@sita.co.za> wrote: > John McKown wrote: > > >> I've seen s/he used to cover both genders. > >​Well, being computer professionals, despite not being of the UNIX > variety, perhaps we use use the regular expression: s?he​ > >

Re: STCK question

John McKown wrote: >> I've seen s/he used to cover both genders. >​Well, being computer professionals, despite not being of the UNIX variety, >perhaps we use use the regular expression: s?he​ >​(the ? means "repeat 0 or 1 times" aka "optional"). Unless we post in the >ISPF forum whereupon it be

Re: STCK question

That's a great write up by Tony. The only thing missing is assembler code snippets ;) On 9/06/2015 4:26 AM, Tony Harminc wrote: I'm not sure if your question is mostly a technical how-to, or more about output formats. Seems to me there is a decision to be made about whether you want to display

Re: STCK question

On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Robert A. Rosenberg wrote: > At 01:14 -0400 on 06/11/2015, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote about Re: > STCK question: > > >And assuming that Janet is a he. >> >> Or that you accept the gender neutral pronoun "he", w

Re: STCK question

At 01:14 -0400 on 06/11/2015, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote about Re: STCK question: >And assuming that Janet is a he. Or that you accept the gender neutral pronoun "he", which has been around for centuries. I've seen s/he used to

Re: STCK question

In <09c701d0a3a5$da7beb70$8f73c250$@mcn.org>, on 06/10/2015 at 10:49 AM, Charles Mills said: >And assuming that Janet is a he. Or that you accept the gender neutral pronoun "he", which has been around for centuries. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see

Re: STCK question

In , on 06/09/2015 at 10:04 AM, J R said: >The essence of her question was, having subtracted start stck from >end stck, how to extract microseconds from the result? Divide by 4096, convert to decimal and edit. STCKF TOD MVI TOD,0 LGRDIFF,TOD SRAG

Re: STCK question

And assuming that Janet is a he. Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2015 6:08 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: STCK question Shirley the code[1] was

Re: STCK question

gt; From: Janet Graff <004dc9e91b6d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Date: 06/09/2015 09:08 AM > Subject: Re: STCK question > Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > > Thanks for everyone's suggestions! I did ask for formatting so

Re: STCK question

Thanks for everyone's suggestions! I did ask for formatting so the output looks like time but I think the decimal output will be useful as well. Janet -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send emai

Re: STCK question

To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: STCK question If you know that the time difference will be less than 24 hours, you can add X'8126D60E4600' (the TOD value at midnight on Jan 1, 1972), and pass that to STCKCONV or BLSUXTOD, and just use the time portion of the date/ti

Re: STCK question

04:19 -0400 > From: jayare...@hotmail.com > Subject: Re: STCK question > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > > Janet specifically asked to display in microseconds! I assumed she knows how > to convert binary to decimal to character. > > The essence of her question was,

Re: STCK question

:22 -0400 > From: shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net > Subject: Re: STCK question > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > > In , on 06/08/2015 >at 02:44 PM, J R said: > > >Shift the value right 12 bits and you will have microseconds. (do it > >algebraically if you want to rou

Re: STCK question

https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker From: Sri h Kolusu To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 09/06/2015 01:03 Subject: Re: STCK question Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List >>> SORT also has the capability to convert a STCK/E valu

Re: STCK question

In , on 06/08/2015 at 02:44 PM, J R said: >Shift the value right 12 bits and you will have microseconds. (do it >algebraically if you want to round up) >Convert to character and display. Close but no cigar; convert to decimal or convert to hh:mm:ss.ss. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.)

Re: STCK question

00248cce9f3-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Date: 06/08/2015 04:33 PM > Subject: Re: STCK question > Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > > Surely this is on cbttape.org. > > > In a message dated 6/8/2015 6:27:49 P.M. Central D

Re: STCK question

Surely this is on cbttape.org. In a message dated 6/8/2015 6:27:49 P.M. Central Daylight Time, rob.schr...@gmail.com writes: Use the assembler macros, LE has some functions to do the conversion, SORT also has the capability to convert a STCK/E value into a human legible time.

Re: STCK question

Use the assembler macros, LE has some functions to do the conversion, SORT also has the capability to convert a STCK/E value into a human legible time. Rob Schramm On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 4:26 PM Tony Harminc wrote: > On 8 June 2015 at 14:25, Janet Graff > <004dc9e91b6d-dmarc-requ...@listser

Re: STCK question

On 8 June 2015 at 14:25, Janet Graff <004dc9e91b6d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > I’d like to show this as “Your procedure took nn.nn.n.n microseconds”,or some > variation on this > theme. I'm not sure if your question is mostly a technical how-to, or more about output formats. Seem

Re: STCK question

To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Date: 06/08/2015 11:25 AM > Subject: STCK question > Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > > I need my product to report on the amount of clock time aprocedure > took. I have captured the STCK before and after theprocedure. The > procedures take ve

Re: STCK question

Shift the value right 12 bits and you will have microseconds. (do it algebraically if you want to round up) Convert to character and display. Job done! === > Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2015 18:25:21 + > From: 004dc9e91b6d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu > Subject: STCK ques

Re: STCK question

Oops didn't see you already mentioned that :) I really think it should work though... I mean, if you subtract, microseconds are still in the same spot, right? Tom Brennan wrote: Can you use the STCKCONV macro? Janet Graff wrote: I need my product to report on the amount of clock time aproce

Re: STCK question

> I need my product to report on the amount of clock time aprocedure > took. I have captured the STCK before and after theprocedure. The > procedures take very little time and I want to show theelapsed time > to the end user. > > As two examples > > Start Time CF115F56BCCEB945 > End Time

Re: STCK question

Can you use the STCKCONV macro? Janet Graff wrote: I need my product to report on the amount of clock time aprocedure took. I have captured the STCK before and after theprocedure. The procedures take very little time and I want to show theelapsed time to the end user. As two examples

Re: STCK question

know you are on recent hardware, use STCKF. (The F stands for "fast.") Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Janet Graff Sent: Monday, June 08, 2015 11:25 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: STCK questi

Re: STCK question

http://www.longpelaexpertise.com/toolsTOD.php Bit 51 (of bits 0-63) is incremented every microsecond. Trim the difference by 12 bits or divide by 4096. Convert the remainder to decimal. 120CFE8C -> 120CF -> 0.073,935 seconds On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Janet Graff <004dc9e91b6d-dmarc-requ

Re: STCK question

Is this in assembler? Doesn't EDMASK help in making it readable? Lizette > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] > On Behalf Of Janet Graff > Sent: Monday, June 08, 2015 11:25 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA

STCK question

I need my product to report on the amount of clock time aprocedure took.  I have captured the STCK before and after theprocedure.  The procedures take very little time and I want to show theelapsed time to the end user.   As two examples   Start Time CF115F56BCCEB945 End Time  CF115F57 1ED8