In a recent note, Peter Hunkeler said: > Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 23:16:19 +0200 > > How many of the programs designed to run in batch are coded to cope > with longer than 100 byte parms? Not too many probably. > I suspect a greater number than you believe. First, ASMA90. Well, that's only a single program, but it's heavily used.
Likewise, the "C" compiler. And I suspect that load modules output from "C" suffer no 100-byte restriction. > I'd strongly suggest the binder attribute is declared an absolute > must to allow passing longer than 100 byte PARMS to the program. APF > or not doesn't matter. > > The benefit: No need for a system wide option, no need for a system > command, cheaper to implement, and most importantly, no unnecessary > incompatibility. > One of Don's concerns was for an NJE- or JES- plex. Hosts supporting readers shouldn't pass long PARMs to execution hosts that can't deal with them. a systemS wide option can enforce this. -- 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
