In <[email protected]>, on
12/16/2014
at 01:18 AM, Paul Gilmartin
<[email protected]> said:
>Why is this considered an error?
The buffer length had to fit in a signed[1] half word, and they didn't
change that when the large block interface came along.
>In fact, 32761 is accepted;
That I don't understand; I would have expected the cutoff to be 32760.
>On what rationale is this based?
The dead hand of history.
[1] Even had it been longer, the 16-bit data length in the count
field would still have imposed[2] a 64Ki-1 restriction.
[2] Yes, I know about track overflow, but there are issues.
--
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
