> On Oct 10, 2017, at 9:17 PM, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: > > My comments are on the bottom because it made more sense to put them after > the question(s). > > --- [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> wrote: > > From: Clark Morris <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> > To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] git, z/OS and COBOL > Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 21:56:34 -0300 > > [Default] On 10 Oct 2017 10:48:59 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> (Farley, > Peter x23353) wrote: > >> Frank, >> > <SNIP> > >> Alternatively, do your programmers really make any sensible real-world use >> of COBOL line numbers in columns 1-6, or is it just "tradition"? After all, >> no one has had to use a card sorter to re-order a program source whose card >> tray was dropped on the floor for some decades. > > Vendors which supply COBOL source probably use IEBUPDTE or their own > proprietary means of updating (and maybe even their own library > system) that depends on sequence numbers in columns 1 - 6. In the > 1990s I had to deal with vendor source that was updated by their > system using sequence numbers. As I recall, JES2 and JES3 source > maintenance used IEBUPDTE and sequence numbers in 73 - 80 back in the > 1980s when I was doing SMP/E work (I was at an installation that went > from HASP to JES3 to JES2). > > Clark Morris > <snippage> I haven’t been exposed to them (Vendors who supplied source) in 4-5 years. The ones I have dealt with were payroll systems and accounting systems and SMF reporting systems. all used iebupdte and it really works well (for these systems). However some of their systems were lets say less than fool proof. They would send out updates to copybooks and not necessarily recompile the programs that used the copy books. When our person got an update for a copybook, he used fileaid to scan the source library and any source that used the copybook was recompiled, no matter what the vendor said. This is a second hand story. One day the person got an update for a copybook from the vendor and was told that only Program #1 & 3 4 6 7 10 needed to be recompiled. He did a scan for other programs that used the copy book and found 15. He called up the vendor and got into a heated discussion about the issue. The updates were really needed because of some tax thing. We went ahead and compiled 15 instead of the 6 that were called for. The update went well and the recompiles went well and moved into testing and ran well. Then they were moved into production and everything went well. The salesman for the product happened to be non and we asked for a quick meeting about this. The meeting took 30 minutes and the salesman came out and headed for a phone and we couldn’t hear the conversation other than it was animated lets say. The salesman took it to his boss and apparently it got the whole company involved. From then on when copybooks were updated *All* of the referencing programs got recompiled. The vendor was not a friend anymore and relationship got strained. We were no longer asked out for any dinners (boo hoo).
Ed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
