On Fri, 6 Jun 2014 15:49:48 -0500, John McKown wrote:
>>
>> IBM would have done better to make system() follow the prevailing
>> POSIX convention and invent a new name, e.g. __IBM_system() for
>> the idiosyncratic one.
>
>I wouldn't even have bothered with using system() to do a LINK function.
>I'd likely have created a __link() function instead.
>
The non-POSIX variant has two subvariants, one for LINK and one for TMP.
I think Rexx did well with:
address SH
address TSO
address LINKPGM
address LINKMVS
... and many others, all different.
-- gil
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
