On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 11:57:05 -0600, Greg Dyck wrote: >On 1/10/2017 11:30 AM, Charles Mills wrote: >> The single TIOT is a limit to "virtualization." > >Certainly the function could be useful. While conceptually it seems >easy to do, where the rubber meets the road in allocation, access >methods, SMF accounting, and more, it would be a very >disruptive/difficult function to implement since the TIOT is tied to the >currently active 'jobstep'. > The disruptiveness or difficulty of a posteriori implementation merely underlines the deficiency of a priori planning. Of course, I'm biased by the ease, simplicity, and transparency of POSIX shell redirection to achieve a similar function.
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 18:26:27 +0000, David W Noon wrote: > >Simply use PL/I with the TITLE() option on the OPEN statement. ... > >If you really are wedded to COBOL, ask for the language to offer a new >facility in the ENVIRONMENT DIVISION, ... > No. The facility should be transparent to the attached program (no code changes). Charles isn't entitled to alter FTP to meet his needs. >This is far more straightforward than fiddling with multiple TIOT, SIOT, >DSAB, etc. This also avoids the filth known as environment variables. > Why do you call a potentially effective approach that doesn't match your habits "filth". But environment variables are merely an additional PARM (see the specification of the exec() syscall) and no more transparent than the alternate DDNAME list (filth?) as a second PARM. DDNAMEs seem to have had the noble objective of isolating a program from details of external data. In the context of concurrent processing, DDNAMEs "missed it by this much!" -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
