Shmuel, In <[email protected]>, on 11/09/2013 at 12:07 PM, John McDowell <[email protected]> said:
>With this context in mind I would be interested in hearing ideas >about what JCL could be. >>Are you including allocation and disposition messages? No, I am trying to limit the scope. It is possible that the scope may turn out to broader than I expect but I am trying to keep the effort more contained. >- Creating a new attribute (that needs to be acted on by a >component other than the Converter/Interpreter (C/I)) is difficult >>It used to be, back in OS/360, but with the addition of SJF it became >>a piece of cake. The Scheduler JCL Facility (SJF) is very useful but it is built on top of the preexisting C/I infrastructure, I am not looking to usurp SJF but rather the infrastructure it rests upon. >- Providing new functions that are performed by the C/I (e.g. >iteration, simple arithmetic, etc.) is possible >>Probably harder than you think. Perhaps, but I am trying very hard to make it as easy as possible :-), primarily by leveraging existing technology (e.g. REXX) and by limiting the scope of changes to the Converter only. John McDowell ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
