On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 16:24:49 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wrote:

>When long PARMS have been discussed here previously, the reactionaries
>and IBM loyalists have objected, "Oh, no!  We can't have that!  Suddenly
>programs that clearly failed on JCL errors will instead program check
>on buffer overruns and our help desk bandwidth will be strained."

Really?  I don't remember anyone saying that.  What I remember seeing is 
that any program that accepts a PARM should be coded so that it can be 
called from a program that might pass a longer PARM. 

Indeed, when I started as an application programmer in 1970, that was 
the standard that my code was expected to follow.

-- 
Tom Marchant

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to