On 12 Nov 2007 12:31:04 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Thomas Berg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 3:09 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: SV: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING... >> >> > -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- >> > Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List >> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För Ed Gould >> > Skickat: den 12 november 2007 20:41 >> > Till: [email protected] >> > Ämne: Re: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING... >> > >> > On Nov 12, 2007, at 1:24 PM, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote: >> > >> > > >> > > I want to be able to use REPLACING for such a copybook WITHOUT >> > > modifying the copybook (because I don't own it and am not allowed to >> > > change it). >> > > >> > > Why can't we do such a simple thing? >> > > >> > > Peter >> > >> > Peter, >> > >> > There are usually ways around this one is to copy the member to a >> > different library and change and then when you compile just add the >> > library in front of the concatenation. As to why... ask the >> > dark side:)
It is now available in the 2002 COBOL standard as COPY xxx REPLACING [LEADING / TRAILING] yyy BY zzz. Unfortunately IBM has not implemented it. >> > >> > Ed >> >> The ground problem with COPY's is that they often have the requirement >> of standards and "one source at one place". And if You - when You have >> a big organisation and want consistency in developement - are using >> meta database products as Datamanager etc, You definitely don't have >> the option of changing the COPY ! > >Exactly! Multiple application groups using common copybooks for files >passed from one application to another, the creating group owns the copybook >and you, the using group, do not have the right or the authority to change >it. > >And creating your own group's "private" copy is not permitted either, >because that copy will not be updated when the "owning" group changes the >master copy. > >> The whole point of using an option like COPY REPLACE is to make >> temporary/local changes of a permanent source. Which means it should >> be versatile and flexible. Doing a rigid and limited solution for >> the need is to missing the point completely. > >My point precisely. > >Thank you. > >Peter > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
