In a recent note, Chase, John said: > Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 11:53:10 -0500 > > Seems to me that allowing instream data within a PROC would add little value > unless it was accompanied by allowing variable substitution to occur within > I agree that variable substitution in instream data would be extremely valuable, whether in a PROC or in open code. With SET symbols, I can refer to a data set name set in one place as a symbolic everywhere except in control statements for utilities (IDCAMS, SMP/E UCLIN, etc.) I'd relish being able to make the change only once in an entire JCL file.
> the instream data. Without substitution, any change desired in the instream > data would require editing the PROC, which would affect all jobs that invoke > it. I'm assuming that in the general sense, each job would require > something unique in the instream data; that's why the DDNAME keyword is > available on the DD statement. > There's still some value where a substantial fraction of the calls can use default values, but the entire control file can be overridden, e.g. for a test. There's no need for the "//label DDNAME= name" statement to supply overriding DD statements, although I agree it provides some error detection. -- gil -- StorageTek INFORMATION made POWERFUL ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
