IDENTIFY has existed and been documented since Old Man Noach got high on PCP. Yes, CICS should have known better.
The RFE wouldn't be for unique names; that ship has sailed. It would be for new syntax on COPY. If your program needs both, you're screwed. Welcome to CM Hell. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [[email protected]] on behalf of Paul Gilmartin [[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2022 9:11 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Name conflict: CICS macro name IDENTIFY conflicts with MVS macro name IDENTIFY On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 12:18:56 +0000, Seymour J Metz wrote: >There is no COPY ddname(member) in HLASM. That sounds like an obvious >candidate for an RFE. > Hasn't the MVS macro name IDENTIFY existed long enough that CICS should have known better? That's not an RFE; tt's a bug; BAD. Suppose a program needs both services. >-----Original Message----- >From: Farley, Peter x23353 >Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2022 2:07 PM > >Cross-posted to IBM-MAIN and CICS-L. > >We just encountered this. Our SDLC mechanism has CICS.BASE.MACLIB (an ALIAS >for the current product version library) positioned in the assembler >translate step BEFORE the SYS1.MACLIB library. SOP, put all licensed >product libraries ahead of base system libraries, right? > >Not in this case. Turns out we have some old assembler ode that uses the >MVS IDENTIFY macro for reasonable business purposes, but now the CICS MACLIB >ALSO has a macro named IDENTIFY. -- 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
