In <[email protected]>, on
08/08/2013
at 11:07 AM, Paul Gilmartin <[email protected]> said:
>On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 16:43:41 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: >
>>>Alas, IBM developers abandoned this paradigm. One writes to the
>>>operator's console not using QSAM, but WTO; one writes to the TSO
>>>terminal not using QSAM to SYSTSPRT, but TPUT.
>>
>>Actually, they DTRT in *those* cases, IMHO. Writing to the operator is
>>more than a simple I/O, at least with MCS, and if you open a QSAM DCB
>>with the ddname allocated to the terminal then you can use GET and PUT
>>transparently.
>>
>Ummm... I believe that in a conventional TSO terminal session
>SYSTSPRT isn't even allocated.
1. There's nothing special about SYSTSPRT. It's only relevance is
that the TMP in batch creates a stack element for the ddnames
SYSTSIN and SYSTSPRT.
2. Your JCL determines what is allocated. There's nothing in TSO
that allocates any hardwired ddname.
3. You can allocate a ddname to the terminal both in JCL and in
dynamic allocation. QSAM doesn't depend on the ddname being
SYSTSIN or SYSTSPRT.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
