On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 09:40:01 -0500, Paul Gilmartin <[email protected]> wrote:
>Clear enough if I read it carefully, but I dislike the user interface design. >I have a basic understanding of LOAD, LINK, ATTACH, XCTL, ...; much >less of ISPF behavior. I find it a needless burden on the user to introduce >novel terminology for existing concepts. Had I been making the decision, >instead of SELECT PGM(MYPROG) I would have used LINK(MYPROG), and >instead of SELECT CMD(MYCMD) I would have used ATTACH(MYCMD). > The difference is much more than a difference between LINK and ATTACH, gil. Part of the difference is the parameter list, too. >And "a unique argument list format" has always baffled me. What ever >was wrong with R1 pointing to a vector of addresses of argument >strings? CMD is used for attaching TSO commands, which expect a different parameter list than the standard linkage used by, e.g., EXEC PGM= (which is what ISPF uses for PGM). -- Walt Farrell IBM STSM, z/OS Security Design ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
