On Feb 20, 2016, at 11:25 AM, Rob Schramm wrote:
But isn't it the point? We would all prefer to live in a world
where bad
coding doesn't happen. I would venture a guess that most have been
in a
situation that called for a bad temporary solution until a fix
could be
found. In which case the expertise of the system programmer comes
into
play and says "while I wouldn't recommend running in this
configuration for
long, we can do X to keep things going in production.". Even with
some of
the functions that seem outlandish (highly dependent on your point of
view), there is at least one person on IBM-Main that has had to use it
either because of inherent design constraints or to get thru a bad
situation. One more " trick " to add to the sysprogs bag-of-tricks.
As for the name.. They should have called it a z131z and made a
palindrome. Agreed that z13ses is just bad. But we should agree to
something... since it is here to stay.
Rob Schramm
Rob:
I think that we pay IBM the big bucks to produce code that is
reliable (IBM blew it with DFP in the early stages) so the mega ptf
tapes more or less disappeared because the customers were complaining
at both GUIDE and SHARE about it and IBM finally started to put their
act together . There was *NEVER* talk about upgrading the processor
just so IBM could do it correctly. *IF* IBM would have taken that
position I think some other vendor would have finally got their toe
hold in the ground. IBM got their act together and the mega PTF tapes
disappeared. So you want to go back to the "good" old days and with
mega PTF's ? I for one don't want to.
BTW I am still pissed at IBM treatment of JAVA and their total
replacement of the product instead of just putting out fixes for one
or two (or even) three csects.
Ed
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
