In <[email protected]>, on 06/06/2015
at 12:41 AM, Joel Ewing <[email protected]> said:
>Why this insistent fixation on TCB structure,
Because *that* was the claim that I was rebutting. Because solving a
problem usually requires a correct analysis of what is happening.
Neither "My recollection is that the immediate bailout from the CLIST
and from batch TSO on a non-zero TSO command processor RC only
occurred for commands running "directly" under the batch TMP TCB" nor
"If you are invoking the SEND command from a CLIST in certain
environments (we were, in batch TSO), the non-zero return code can
cause the CLIST containing the SEND command (and batch TSO) to
immediately terminate without completing any following statements in
the CLIST." mentions IKJEFT1{AB].
--
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
