Glad to hear that someone followed all the rules so that,
unannounced COBOL 5+ didn't cause you packed decimal problems
with Truncation and the like. Or same thing with binary.
Steve Thompson
On 3/27/2023 10:31 AM, Schmitt, Michael wrote:
The last time we mass-converted and recompiled our COBOL was from OS/VS COBOL
to VS COBOL II in 1992. Since then we've migrated our 7 million lines of COBOL
code...
- 1998 Language Environment
- 2000 COBOL for MVS & VM
- 2003 COBOL for OS/390 & VM
- 2004 COBOL for z/OS & OS/390 3.2
- 2005 3.3
- 2006 3.4
- 2011 4.2
- 2020 6.2
By doing... nothing.
The hardest part of going to IBM Enterprise COBOL for z/OS 6 was the PDSE
requirement for load modules.
So, in my experience, we don't need to know when our COBOL programs were last
used. And we already have tools that give us the compile date and version, both
from IBM and home grown.
We still have a large number of programs that haven't been recompiled since the
VS COBOL II migration. They coexist just fine.
(You may have to *relink* to pick up the Language Environment bootstrap
programs)
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On Behalf Of
Steve Pryor
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2023 1:39 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: A question or two on zOS issues
There are a couple of pressing issues in z/OS that I'm sure many folks are
aware of but about which there doesn't seem to be much being done. I'm curious
as to what other IBM-MAINer's thoughts might be. Specifically, I'm talking
about:
1.) migration to IBM's latest COBOL release, and
2.) the not-really-that-far-off issue of Year 2042
I've been asked several times recently whether we (a z/OS ISV) should consider
developing products to address these issues. Frankly, though, I live in an
ivory tower and while I sometime *think* I know what installations problems and
needs are, I'm usually surprised to find that reality is quite different. So
I'd like to throw a couple of questions out to the list for comment:
1.) Would a reporting utility that determined which COBOL programs were
executed (and which ones weren't), and what release and options they were
compiled with be significantly helpful in a COBOL migration? What other
features would be nice to have? Or is this a low priority for most
installations, who are perhaps trying to justify keeping the mainframe alive
and/or conducting business as usual, let alone doing a COBOL migration project?
2.) It's rather shocking that 2042 is so close and not much seems to be
happening. We are one of the vendors that have a date-simulation utility, but
we don’t know if data centers have any near-term plans for 2042. Would it be
worthwhile to have a 2042 date-simulation product now, or is everyone going to
cross their fingers and try to use a test LPAR once the operating system fully
supports 2042 dates?
Thanks for any comments and insight the IBM-MAIN hive mind might have.
Steve Pryor
CTO
DTS Software, LLC
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
--
Regards,
Steve Thompson
VS Strategies LLC
Westfield IN
972-983-9430 cell
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
