> Does DFSORT input allow comments? There are several things every
language > should support, such as:
Paul,
Yes DFSORT does allow comments.
Specify comment statements by coding an asterisk (*) in column 1. A
comment statement is printed along with other DFSORT program control
statements but is not otherwise processed.
A statement with blanks in columns 1 through 71 is treated as a comment
statement.
Comment statements are allowed only in the DFSPARM, SYSIN, and SORTCNTL
data sets.
Also you can have comments right after the control statements provided you
have a space between. Here is a sample.
//SYSIN DD *
SORT FIELDS=(01,10,CH,A, $ EMP-NUMBER ASCENDING
50,08,PD,D) $ SALARY DESCENDING
OUTREC BUILD=(20,30, $ EMP-NAME
X, $ SPACE
01,10, $ EMP-NUMBER
X, $ SPACE
50,08) $ SALARY
/*
Further if you have any questions please let me know
Thanks,
Kolusu
DFSORT Development
IBM Corporation
IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> wrote on
11/20/2015 12:34:28 PM:
> From: Paul Gilmartin <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Date: 11/20/2015 12:34 PM
> Subject: Re: Deleting all members of a pds
> Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]>
>
> Re: https://listserv.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind1511&L=ibm-
> main&P=R37953&1=ibm-
> main&9=A&I=-3&J=on&X=C539315E5DAE4A6734&Y=PaulGBoulder%
> 40AIM.COM&d=No+Match%3BMatch%3BMatches&z=4
>
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 10:51:04 -0800, retired mainframer wrote:
>
> ><snip>
> >
> >> When better techniques become available, perhaps the inferior ones
should
> >> me marked in future editions as deprecated.
> >
> >So every time IBM makes an update to a marketed product, they
> should search all the freebies to see if they might need some
> pedantic update to the code or documentation? It's not enough that
> IBM allows people to spend time on the clock to develop this stuff
> for which they will not charge and make it available to all, even
> non-customers and competitors? That would probably kill the
> incentive to release any "as is/no warranty or support" tools of any
kind.
> >
> No, but it was implied earlier in this thread that the document
> contains contributed
> material. They might likewise consider suggested updates.
>
> Corequisite updates are a sore point. Many IBM utilities fail with
> z/OS UNIX files
> as input because of something akin to "unsupported device type", while
they
> continue to support card readers and punches. Often it appears the
check is
> gratuitous -- it can be defeated by preconcatenating an empty
> Classic data set.
> Simply, such checks should be eliminated; deferred to the access method
to
> succeed or fail.
>
>
> >Didn't anyone read the reference? On page 84: " For PDSs with
> lots of members, you can improve the performance of the IDCAMS step
> by deleting the members in reverse order. To do this, just add:
> > SORT FIELDS=(1,8,CH,D)
> >to CTL2CNTL to sort the members in descending order.
> >
> It would have been clearer in CTL2CNTL, clearly commented.
>
> Does DFSORT input allow comments? There are several things every
language
> should support, such as:
>
> o Comments, like HLASM "*".
>
> o No-op, like HLASM ANOP
>
> o User-generated error messages, like HLASM MNOTE.
>
> There are reasons for all these.
>
> -- gil
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
