Ed, you and I shared some of that life at Security Pacific Bank. Too late to check on SPAC now, but my recollection from before I met you until today, I have always used/encountered LRECL 255. I know that limits record data to 251, but is there something special in having 4 extra bytes? It's just a custom that seems to prevail in most shops that have standardized on VB.
The big divide is whether to use FB or VB. Since those cannot be concatenated, it's a huge and generally irrevocable choice. . . J.O.Skip Robinson Southern California Edison Company Electric Dragon Team Paddler SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager 323-715-0595 Mobile 626-302-7535 Office robin...@sce.com -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Ed Jaffe Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 11:00 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):LRECL=255 vs LRECL=259 My whole life I have seen variable length CLIST/EXEC libraries allocated as RECFM=VB w/LRECL=259. Clearly, the intent was to allow up to 255-character source lines. At PSI, we provide the option for customers to allocate our CLIST/EXEC libraries either RECFM=FB w/LRECL=80 or RECFM=VB w/LRECL=259. One customer claims the industry-standard for RECFM=VB CLIST/EXEC libraries is LRECL=255 rather than LRECL=259. LRECL=255 would allow for only 251-character source lines, which seems rather strange to me. Of course, my personal observations and experiences provide nothing more than anecdotal evidence. Like a man with two watches being unsure of the time, I am now unsure if LRECL=259 is widespread practice or if I was observing only outliers. Any insight would be appreciated... -- Edward E Jaffe Phoenix Software International, Inc 831 Parkview Drive North El Segundo, CA 90245 http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
