I'd lay good odds that most of the DCB oriented stuff will stay RMODE(24) until the end of the age of mainframes. So much code is dependent on 3 byte addresses that even if IBM wanted to update it, end users would revolt when their applications which used 3 byte addresses from the 1980s abended. I remember the nastiness when SWA went above the line and what was an address became a token. Everybody had to either keep SWA below the line (an option), or rewrite their code to use the SWAREQ(?) macro instead of "chain chasing".
I wish that IBM would "wise up". Guess what I/O interface already allows AMODE(64) callers. The UNIX I/O calls have both AMODE(31) and AMODE(64) variants (BPX1* and BPX4*). I wish that IBM would extend these to allow access to standard z/OS data sets. A PDS could be viewed as a subdirectory, with each member being a file. I've read that PDSE's can even have member names > 8 characters, but I've not run across one yet which does. (We're a small shop and don't have much advanced software installed). -- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets(r) 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone * [email protected] * www.HealthMarkets.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of Mike Schwab > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 6:10 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: LOAD and DELETE macro instructions > > I am wondering if z/OS 2.x will bring 64 bit address constants into the > operating system so everything can run above the 2GB bar. > > On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 5:19 PM, John Gilmore <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Shmuel says: > > > > | AMODE(64) is not appropriate for a module that is not executable. > > > > Peter Relson---I am now wary of paraphrasing him---appears to judge > > that AMODE is moot for tables. I have said and say that AMODE(64) > is > > not just appropriate but desirable for a read-only module that > > contains doubleword ADCONs. > > > > Take your pick; or consult an augur, who will to wield his lituus in > > helping you make your choice. > > > > John Gilmore, Ashland, MA 01721 - USA > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > - > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > > email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > -- > Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA > Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
