On Sat, 21 May 2005 00:13:14 -0400, Joe Zitzelberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On May 20, 2005, at 5:16 PM, Peter Hunkeler wrote: >> How many of the programs designed to run in batch are coded to cope >> with longer than 100 byte parms? ... > >Many programs are. ... Ok. So Peter asked the wrong question. Forget about those that are designed for the long parms. What about all the gazillion programs that are not? All the accounting programs, manufacturing support programs, time accounting programs, etc.; the home grown life-blood of industry (or at least that part still on MVS). > >> Imagine some typo in the JCL makes the PARM longer than 100, say 102 >> bytes. ... > >You have put the cart before the horse. None of your existing, >functional, JCL passes a parm longer than 100 bytes ... >... >The fix is simple. Just don't pass more than a program is expecting. >Today, that is a certain error (JCL error), tomorrow it will still be >an error (program not expecting error). Either way it is an error. >Nothing in this change can break a program that is currently working >correctly today. He said "... typo ...". Passing the additional data is unintentional. Fine. It's an error. Only in one case you get a JCL error. In the other case you get in incorrectly executing problem that may or may not abend. It may meerly produce a totally bollixed General Ledger for the month. No problem unless your company cares about money. Pat O'Keefe ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
