My guess is that the call for the header record passed the record from the FD buffer. And subsequent calls pass the record after it's moved to WORKING STORAGE
> -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] > On Behalf Of Bill Woodger > Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2017 12:20 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Program now working, but why? > > Let's guess that the program is statically binderered/linkedited. > > Firstly, it is entirely possible that even 100% identical programs in > Production > and Test "work" and "fail". After all, that's how we get Production failures. > So, > same data, or not? > > You seem just ever-so-slightly guarded about messages. Were there *any* > messages from the COBOL program? > > There are some "behavioural" changes from OS/VS COBOL to later ones, but > they are in the Migration Guide (or at least "a" Migration Guide). > > Why did someone decide to code-around the header record? Part of a > strategy of ignoring all records one by one, or something more purposeful? > > It sounds like the header is causing the problem. Is the header the "same" > (length, types of values) in Production? My guess for now is that something > about the header is causing an issue in the Assembler program. > > Mmm... single CALL to the Assembler (in a PERFORMed procedure)? Multiple > physical CALLs? If the latter, do all CALLs have the same number of > parameters? There's a possibility there, but stretching to make it a guess > with > information so far. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to > lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
