I assume SE is correct because SDSF is just invoking the ISPF EDIF service, and ISPF EDIT handles it correctly. None of the "pure" SDSF panels handle the scroll field placement properly. And from within SE, only EDIT commands are accepted. It won't accept SDSF specific commands. Just another of life's minor annoyances!
Robert Ngan CSC Financial Services Group IBM Mainframe Assembler List <[email protected]> wrote on 2015/11/24 21:31:16: > From: David de Jongh <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Date: 2015/11/24 21:32 > Subject: Re: Change in GETMAIN behavior > Sent by: IBM Mainframe Assembler List <[email protected]> > > Robert, > In SDSF edit (line command SE) the scroll field is right justified, at least > with a 137 character width. I have a number of PComm macros that paste > stacked commands into the command area. It's also useful for downloads, > where the dataset name makes the command too long. > David de Jongh > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of Robert Ngan > Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 6:19 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Change in GETMAIN behavior > > I asked that SDSF be changed so the scroll field dynamically move to the > right side of the screen based on the current screen width, which would have > given more room for stacked commands but that was also shot down. > I have a 142 column screen, with the scroll field in the middle of it! > > Robert Ngan > CSC Financial Services Group > IBM Mainframe Assembler List <[email protected]> wrote on > 2015/11/24 07:02:07: > > > From: Elardus Engelbrecht <[email protected]> > > To: [email protected] > > Date: 2015/11/24 07:24 > > Subject: Re: Change in GETMAIN behavior Sent by: IBM Mainframe > > Assembler List <[email protected]> > > > > Tom Marchant wrote: > > > > >Paul Gilmartin wrote: > > > > >>As a more applications-oriented programmer than systems-oriented, > > I find this strengthens my wish for an IGVINITGETMAIN-like facility > > with ASID scope ... > > > > >Did you submit a requirement? > > > > For a 'one person, unfunded, spare time project'? Paul, you may need > > to motivate (perhaps for ASID scope) it properly to catch big > blue'sattention. > > > > Good luck! (Some of my formal requests to IBM were shot down (WAD, > > etc.) ... I don't blame them... oh well...) > > > > Groete / Greetings > > Elardus Engelbrecht > > > > [1] - I got an ex-colleague to submit a requirement to have SDSF > > command line to be expanded to more than one line (for those long VTAM > > console commands). It was shot down - WAD or that request never > > reached IBM in the first place. > > > > Anyways, that feature was introduced at a later SDSF version plus a > > command history as a bonus.
