I can't see any generic reason not to enable system symbols, but like many changes that IBM has introduced over the years, it could have a deleterious effect in particular cases. I would not make this change enterprise-wide without publicizing it and preferably testing extensively.
The problem is reflected in IBM's reluctance to enable system symbols for batch two decades ago. For started tasks and for TSO, the value of a substituted symbol is clear: it's here and it's now. When a batch job is submitted, it's indeterminate when and in some cases where the job will actually run. I've done some experimenting with it. Some results are intuitive, others maybe less so. But once you enable SYSSYM for batch, it will be in effect for every job in that class on that system. . . J.O.Skip Robinson Southern California Edison Company Electric Dragon Team Paddler SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager 323-715-0595 Mobile 626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Grant Williams Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2017 8:37 PM To: [email protected] Subject: (External):System Symbols (SYSSYM) Hi, Can anyone see a reason for not enabling System Symbols for all job classes (i.e SYSSYM=ALLOW ) ? thanks Grant Williams ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
