Tom Schmidt wrote:
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 10:05:54 -0800, Charles Mills wrote:
Walt, I think the message from the customers is that they would be happy to
accept "your gun, your bullet, your foot." Customers want these symbols
available. If they have a Sysplex and set the dates very differently, well
then, they may see some odd date things happening.
Anyone wishing to use system symbols in JCL can implement JES/SMF exit(s)
to process the system symbols in batch job JCL on a site-by-site basis.
Those folks willing to sacrifice their own limbs are (or ought to be)
capable of doing so today. (Why wait?)
You could, if you really want to chop off whole legs or arms, even define
user symbols for your site or go completely nuts and override the system
symbols with user symbols in the exit(s).
All of this is documented (thanks, IBM) in the MVS Assembler Services Guide
and the MVS Assembler Services Reference Volume 1 (see ASASYMBM service).
Yes, sure, many problems can be solved by coding exits. Every shop will
have their own (we don't like standarization). I would say more: why
don't we write our own software at all ? It would be even cheaper, to
buy the hardware only, and code all the rest.
But seriously: times are a changin, CICS sysprogs no longer compile the
tables, RACF admins no longer need to code ICHRCDE, there are no SYSCAT
or MSTJCL members in NUCLEUS, HCD is used instead of IOCP coding...
Things get more convenient, even on mainframe.
BTW: I think the problem with symbols is not so bothersome, because
batch schedulers provide equivalent functionality. The same apply to
GDGs and scandalous limit of 255 generations (we still have 365-366 days
per year).
(Time for my pills <vbg>)
--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
