I'm not convinced that it would have been too expensive in OS/360. ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on behalf of John McKown <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, July 4, 2023 2:59 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: 0C1 abend
On Tue, Jul 4, 2023, 13:08 Paul Gilmartin < [email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 4 Jul 2023 12:22:26 -0500, John McKown wrote: > > > >{grin} S0C1 is documented. Basically means "you goofed up". I would like > >some Snnn-hh which specifically means "attempted I/O on a DCB (or ACB) > upon > >which an OPEN was attempted, but failed." It might even be nice to have > the > >address initialized to an abend which specifically states "I/O attempted > on > >a DCB/ACB which was was never the object of an OPEN." > > > Wouldn't the code to do take a whole bunch of expensive storage? > I really don't know. Memory today is relatively cheap. It definitely would have been too expensive back in it OS/360 days. > What's the content of the access method pointers prior to OPEN? > "Reserved"? > > -- > 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
