It would seem to be a case of (as I think was mentioned in an earlier reply) 
associating the second SET with the second execution of PROC P and processing 
the second SET *before* starting the second execution of PROC P.  Inserting an 
extra step to execute IEFBR14 just before the second SET statement also gives 
correct results in the GENER output:

//  EXPORT SYMLIST=*                                    
//P     PROC                                            
//GEN   EXEC  PGM=IEBGENER                              
//SYSPRINT  DD  SYSOUT=(,)                              
//SYSIN     DD  DUMMY                                   
//SYSUT2    DD  SYSOUT=(,)                              
//P     PEND                                            
//*                                                     
//  SET V2=WOMBAT  *************************************
//WOMBAT1  EXEC P                                       
//SYSUT1    DD  *,SYMBOLS=JCLONLY                       
GENER STEP;                                             
  WITH V2=&V2..                                         
//WOMBAT2  EXEC P                                       
//SYSUT1    DD  *,SYMBOLS=JCLONLY                       
GENER STEP;                                             
  WITH V2=&V2..                                         
//NEWSTEP EXEC PGM=IEFBR14   <==== INSERTED STEP HERE   
//  SET V2=XYZZY   *************************************
//XYZZY1   EXEC P                                       
//SYSUT1    DD  *,SYMBOLS=JCLONLY                       
GENER STEP;                                             
  WITH V2=&V2..                                         
//XYZZY2   EXEC P                                       
//SYSUT1    DD  *,SYMBOLS=JCLONLY                       
GENER STEP;                                             
  WITH V2=&V2..                                         
//                                                      

HTH

Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf 
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 4:27 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Premature SYMBOL substitution in SYSIN?

On Mon, 9 Nov 2015 10:12:01 -0600, Tom Marchant wrote:
>
>Mine was corrected with OA47958
>
My systems programmer tells me we now have that.  In my somewhat different 
case, the JESJCL shows:
               ...
<Snipped>

Still broke.

--


This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee 
and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader 
of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any 
attachments from your system.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to