On 06/28/2010 08:32 AM, Thomas David Rivers wrote: > Clark Morris wrote: >> On 27 Jun 2010 07:30:35 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote: >> >> Until IBM provides a language or variant such as a systems flavor of >> C/C++ that has access to all of the facilities (including the peculiar >> linking conventions for some JES exits, any management that does not >> keep access to assembler expertise is playing with fire. ... > >> Clark Morris > > Why does such a language need to be provided by IBM? > Can a third-party vendor provide it? > > - Dave Rivers -
It would be unreasonable for IBM to require a third-party product to customize z/OS, or to expect IBM to help diagnose strange z/OS failures caused by bad exits generated by some other vendor's product. z/OS customization must be possible with what is included with z/OS. So until IBM supplies alternative non-Assembler facilities for all exits and customization, some Assembler expertise would seem to be a requirement. Our application programmers are not that familiar with z-architecture, much less Assembly Language; but those of us in mainframe Technical Support certainly are. That knowledge is not just relevant to writing Assembly code utilities and exits, but is also useful in understanding why some approaches to application implementation in higher level languages are inefficient, and useful in having the credibility to communicate that to applications development. A management that thinks it can do without any of that expertise in house is short-changing the organization on multiple fronts. -- Joel C. Ewing, Fort Smith, AR [email protected] Sr. Technical Admin., Mainframe Systems ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
