I eliminated them several years ago when I realized I had probably dropped a deck on the computer room floor for the last time.
There are a couple of situations where they are actually a problem or potential problem: - FTP is or was not tolerant of them in its INPUT (command) file, so DD * sequence numbers are a problem. - If you edit the files on some non-mainframe platform, as I often do, then source changes sometimes slide the numbers over into column 72 or less. Charles -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John McKown Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 5:53 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Any real need for sequence numbers in 73-80 any more? I know that in the past, they were handy for when you dropped your deck of physical cards. And if guess that they can still be handy if you distribute source modifications in a format suitable for processing by IEBUPDTE, like IBM does at times. But I'm having trouble figuring out why I would want to do this with my own code. The reason I'm even considering stopping is because I really prefer to keep my HLASM code in a UNIX directory rather than a PDS. -- I have a theory that it's impossible to prove anything, but I can't prove it. Maranatha! <>< John McKown
