On Jan 4, 2008, at 9:12 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 02:17:36 -0500, J R wrote:
You appear to be using a setup step(s) prior to invoking an
application
in a subsequent JCL step. Why not have the setup step invoke the
application directly, thus avoiding the 100-character PARM limit
of JCL?
Likely because the PARM to that setup step itself would exceed the
100-character limit.
Paul,
While I agree, I also disagree. There is really a big balancing act
that IBM is always on and I can feel sympathy for them (to a certain
extent). I would suggest that to implement something in this area to
provide backward compatibility IBM could leave it at 100 AND create a
new option called (something else) like longparm and allow over a 100
characters and then instead of a half word do 8 byte length and
provide 16G of storage. But that has issues as well. But I would
suggest to you that you put in a SHARE requirement for this and let
IBM respond to it and then complain if they don't come up with a way
to pass more than 100 characters. If there is already a requirement
revote on it and resubmit it and see if you can't get IBM's attention
on it (again). I would also suggest that IBM *KNOWS* about the issue
and either they are at odds on how to implement it or don't want to
implement it or otherwise it would have been a new function or
facility in a 64 bit OS. In any case submit a requirement or revote
one that has been submitted.
Ed
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
