On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 9:49 AM, Paul Gilmartin < [email protected]> wrote:
> On 2016-12-15, at 08:25, John McKown wrote: > > > > This is being done "just in case" they are needed (i.e. the SAN people > > scream long & hard enough about space issues). > > > And when that happens, will they go back and retroactively compress > all the data written so far? And test? Or use a flag to indicate > the format? > > > However, MicroFocus supplies > > 3 different compression routines which can be called from COBOL. What I'm > > trying to convince the programmer to do is write the Wintel COBOL > versions > > of the compression routines ... > > > Be thankful. They could find an emulator and keep the assembler code. > They know better than that. They don't know HLASM. And we (all the mainframers) will be forcefully ejected once this is done. I cannot imagine that the "whomever" who takes up the support of this would know HLASM. Especially _my_ HLASM. My coding techniques are not exactly "intuitively obvious". > > -- gil > > -- Heisenberg may have been here. http://xkcd.com/1770/ Maranatha! <>< John McKown ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
