As a guy who has had to support users who acted based on incorrect material in manuals, I would prefer that the writer refer the reader to another section orto another manual rather than introducing garbled versions of what they say. In particular, there is adequate coverage of issuing commands in Chapter 2. REXX general concepts, Commands to external environments. If they must issue excess verbiage then they should get it right.
The verbiage he quoted is defective; they should drop or reword it. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [[email protected]] on behalf of Charles Mills [[email protected]] Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 11:50 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Gratuitous EXECIO Documentation As a guy who has written a lot of documentation I think I would rather include some excess verbiage and save user frustration and/or a support call. It is a judgment call. You can overdo the redundancy. I have a VS COBOL manual and it includes thorough instructions for writing link editor DD statements. You certainly do not want to include redundant documentation that then becomes wrong when the "other product" changes. Perhaps the verbiage you quote should go in a "usage note" or something like that. Charles -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 8:30 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Gratuitous EXECIO Documentation In: https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSLTBW_2.3.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r3.ikja300/dup0037.htm I see the verbiage: When you use EXECIO, you must ensure that you use quotation marks around any operands, such as DISKW, STEM, FINIS, or LIFO. Using quotation marks prevents the possibility of the operands being substituted as variables. For example, if you assign the variable stem to a value in the exec and then issue EXECIO with the STEM option, if STEM is not enclosed in quotation marks, it is substituted with its assigned value. Sheesh! A similar caution might be included for any command in the Ref., but it doesn't belong. "must ensure"? Well, not always. I infer the etiology: A troublesome user once coded: STEM=SKIP /* perhaps */ EXECIO ... ... got astonishing results; went to SR; got fully proper "REJ; RTFM"; vindictively submitted RCF. A feckless tech writer acceded and added the paragraph. I strongly suspect the matter is covered properly earlier (citation needed) in the Ref., which shouldn't be cluttered with such errant rubbish. (I was reading that Ref. to see whether EXECIO assembles segments of V[B]S records. Didn't find it.) -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
