On Fri, 23 Aug 2013 10:28:19 -0400, John Gilmore wrote: >Whether WAD, 'working as designed', or BAD, 'broken as designed', is >perhaps moot. > >The problem of selecting one among several modules of the same name in >different PDS[E]s for inclusion in an executable is much better >addressed by using a binder LIBRARY control statement than by fiddling >with concatenation sequences. > Does HLASM provide a similar facility nowadays? I know it has long been wished for. Similar concerns for STEPLIB, SYSPROC, SYSEXEC, JCLLIB, ...
But in either case, adding an early catenand library to override one or a few members, perhaps temporarily, may be preferable to editing the source, whether SYSLIN or SYSLIN. Library concatenation is a nicely orthogonal feature of z/OS; conspicuously missing from UNIX, where each processor must supply its own technique, whether a colon-separated list of directory names, or a list of -I options, or perhaps other. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
