----------------------<snip>-----------------
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.
---------------------<unsnip>------------------
I'd be overjoyed if IBM would admit to the possibility of a parm string
up to 32,767 bytes, and design parm-driven software with that in mind.
And allow JCL to accept a parm of that length. Changes to code would be
minimal, since it already uses a halfword length. Changes to JCL
processing might be rather major, so I don't expect this to be done
overnight, as long as it's kep in mind.
Rick
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
