On Tue, 25 Apr 2017 14:12:20 -0500, Tom Marchant ([email protected]) wrote about "Re: program-name is unresolved/uncallable" (in <[email protected]>):
> On Tue, 25 Apr 2017 14:08:06 -0400, Farley, Peter wrote: > >> IMHO that is just sloppy application coding that would not pass a peer >> review by me. It is trivially easy to set and test a flag to remember you >> already issued a given message already and bypass issuing it repeatedly, > > I'd go even further and say that such a message should not be written to > the console. It is not something that an operator should be expected to > deal with. It probably was not intended to go to the console. Most of these messages begin life as a WTO with ROUTCDE=11, which is really intended for the programmer or application user. Unfortunately, some -- perhaps many -- sites reconfigure console routing so that these messages also go to route code 2 (or similar). This means that "general bumpf" goes to the console as well as to the job log. This can be a major annoyance to the operators, and the annoyance is exacerbated by the fact that the messages were never intended to go to the console in the first place. -- Regards, Dave [RLU #314465] *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* [email protected] (David W Noon) *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
