On Sun, 16 Apr 2017 09:14:01 +0200, Peter Hunkeler wrote: > > >While I made this up, I have a hard time to imagine it did not happen that >way. How else would can explain the weird logic behind COND= ? > Assembler mentality. It's the CC mask for a BC to branch around the next step.
>But then IBM recently thought of this better and invented JCL IF-THEN-ELSE. >This was published with MVS/ESA some 28+ years ago. But even now, people still >use the wonderful COND=. > Yes, but is there a concise IF-THEN-ELSE to unconditionally suppress execution of a step; equivalent to COND=(0,LE)? (As long as it's not the first step. Grrr.) And, why, why, why doesn't the parser require that label fields match on corresponding IF, THEN, and ELSE statements? For error checking. And why isn't there an ELSEIF? I hate JCL! They could have done better. IBM doesn't care. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
