On Mar 22, 2016, at 1:47 AM, Bill Woodger wrote:
Ed,
Are you seriously saying that for an applications language the
messages have to be able to be understood by someone with no
knowledge of the language, to someone who should know the language
but doesn't understand the message?
Like I said the message that was put out had no relation to the
issue. Too many FD's is a reasonable solution. The message didn't
even message the were too many FD's.
The programmers (in General) seemed to have a similar issue with many
of the messages. Each time I got a phone call which should have been
short turned into a 30 minute phone call which made me call IBM even
asking other sysprogs before doing so.
IBM wasted countless hours on each message I called in on. I hated it
as did IBM trying to explain messages.
IBM *FINALLY* put out a M&C after 5-7 years of requesting one so even
they got the hint.
The penny counters at IBM must be having a ball.
Ed
Here's a random message from the C link above:
CCN0463 Suboption is not allowed in "&1" option.
Explanation
Suboption is not allowed in the specified option.
In the message text:
&1 is the option name.
User response
Remove the suboption.
So, yes, for C they have commented the line MOVE some-useful-name
TO some-other-useful-name. And yes, I guess that does mean you get
what you pay for.
You've already said you don't want that. So what *do* you want? I'm
not suggesting you check all the COBOL messages, but there's a text
file in the link I provided earlier. Can you have a quick look and
find a message which needs expansion?
That excludes the -U messages. Those could well require attention,
but who would know? They all mean "compiler broke, here's something
which may help the person investigating identify the problem in the
compiler". When unaccompanied by obviously relevant system
messages, what do you do but pass it on to IBM?
Now, I'm not going to "defy" anyone to find a message which doesn't
need some work. But, even if you do find such a thing, just log it
with IBM and they will consider expanding it in the compiler.
Oh, and those seemingly-amusing one which just show a question-
mark? They don't count, as the question-mark will be replaced by
appropriate text depending on the context, if that message is ever
produced.
On Tuesday, 22 March 2016 00:57:38 UTC, Ed Gould wrote:
For sysprogs, I'd expect a consultation for a "U" (the old "D" for
Disaster), but otherwise I'd expect more knowledge amongst the
applications staff.
sigh... with cutting expenses so much in the news (just look at IBM)
you get what you pay for.
Ed
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
