On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 11:32 AM, Paul Gilmartin < [email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Dec 2016 20:19:35 -0800, Charles Mills wrote: > > > You really need to come up to speed on modern opcodes. All of the > performance > > improvements are in new opcodes; the old ones aren't getting any faster. > > There is some cool stuff, ... > > On 2016-12-09, at 09:56, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote: > > > > For myself, I have no need to explore or use such edge cases. All my > symbol > > substitutions stay within the "classic DD *" limit of 80 bytes after > substitution ... > > > > "Doctor! Doctor! It hurts when I do that! --- Well, don't do that!" > > Apparently Peter believes that Charles and I would face fewer > disappointments > if we stayed with techniques that worked forty years ago and avoided edge > cases. > In another thread on another forum, the above attitude is credited for the "demise" of z/OS in today's "leading edge" applications. I know that my manager, back before we were told we were being eliminated, generally wanted to do things so that: (1) they could be easily understood by other, not so well versed (i.e. ignorant), developers; (2) did not take advantage of the latest enhancements because they were not yet proven to be effective and efficient. This lead to things like: (1) "minimal customization" of products - just use the vendor defaults as much as possible; (2) no exits of any kind (HLASM being just too difficult for most to understand - BTW - he is a good HLASM programmer); (3) Don't use UNIX facilities - they are too confusing to others. > > -- 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
