On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 4:24 AM, Ken Brick <[email protected]> wrote: > I suspect the problem with JCL is that the base code was laid down about > fifty years ago. I remember seeing eye catchers with 1968 dates in the late > 1990's. At that time (1960's) I doubt that the developers had the rigourous > "documentation" requirements of even yesteryear much less recent years. So I > think that to days developers are as much in the dark about the code as you > and I.
> Possibly someone out there who kept the source tapes (Seymour Metz (I > apologize in advance about name spelling) could comment about code quality. > And I must say that quality expectation between "1970" and "2010" are > vastly different Sure, but that's an *explanation*, not an *excuse*. Here's the throwdown: would z/OS be easier to use and thus more popular and thus make more money for IBM if something better than JCL were available? -- zMan -- "I've got a mainframe and I'm not afraid to use it" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
