>A completely different topic, but sequence numbers are obviously (I think. Am >I wrong?) entirely a vestigial organ left from the days of punched cards. They >were a lifesaver if you dropped your cards on the floor, and the compilers put >out a warning if you loaded the cards into the reader in incorrect order. But >do sequence numbers have a lick of value today?
I can only second this. I've never every been using sequence number to the last 20 years. I can't believe what I just read about all the mangling being done on PARMDD content. When I code //XYZ DD *, I expect JES to return every single byte exactly as entered when the program is reading the data. Now, as I understand it, when coding PARMDD=XYZ, the initiator will mangle that data under complex rules instead of just concatenating all bytes into one single var-char field, leaving every byte as is. Hmm... // ....PRAMDD=XYZ //*-+----1----+-- // 6----+----7----+----8 //XYZ DD * SomeFirstLongParm // HereWithData=A1234567 ,SomeSecondLongPa // HereWithData=01234567 ,SomeThirdLongPar // HereWithData=B1234567 According to Peter's explanation, the initiator will recognize "standard numbering" on the second line and ignore those 8 characters. The program will get: SomeFirstLongParm // HereWithData=A1234567,SomeSecondLongPa // HereWithData=,SomeThirdLongPar // HereWithData=B1234567 How quickly will one remember that "strip off if punch-card-numbering found" is in effect? -- Peter Hunkeler ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
