I have to agree with "retired" on this one. I can't see any way HLASM could reliably detect this, and there are lots of other ways to do such things. If I was trying to sneak something in, I'd make it much harder to find than this.
This is a strange case. How someone clever enough to code that could be so stupid as to think it was a good idea is beyond me. Instead of writing a few lines of code to deal with CC1, he thought it would be better to wait until a customer reports gibberish output, and he gets caught? In "The Daily WTF?" tradition, "brillant". sas On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 5:49 AM, retired mainframer <[email protected]> wrote: > Some issues are easier to deal with by non-technical methods. Publicizing > the paragraph that precedes the code might demonstrate the desirability of > following the rules to all but the most obnoxious. >
