On Wed, 6 Nov 2013 13:04:08 -0500, Gerhard Postpischil wrote: > >IBM did users a favor by (mostly) not using obvious names. When I worked >at ADR, the help test asked for assistance with a problem they couldn't >solve - the user has a CoBOL program that invoked the sort, but kept >blowing up no matter how large a region was assigned to it. The user had >chosen to name his program SORT! Ten years later, at AMS, the help desk >asked for assistance with a CoBOL program that kept running out of >memory..... > But why didn't they follow the same direction naming library macros? And why isn't STIMER named WAIT, and why isn't LOAD named GET and ... And why do most of them defy the component prefixing conventions?
-- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
