On Thu, 7 Jun 2018 09:27:26 -0500, John McKown wrote: >I've already written a utility program which is designed to run as a UNIX >command, mainly interactively from a UNIX shell, but it works from TSO >OSHELL and in batch via BPXBATCH or Co:Z launcher just fine. So, from a >"practical" viewpoint the following is not really necessary. > >But I am considering making a "version 2.0" which will run "natively" in >the various environments. In particular, the environments I envision are: > >1) batch - directly from an EXEC PGM=UTILITY >2) REXX via IRXJCL - "pure" non-TSO REXX >3) native IKJEFT01 - a true TSO CP (getline/putline with TSO CP command >parameters) >4) REXX under IKJEFT01 - a TSO REXEC environment >5) native UNIX - a UNIX command via a shell >6) REXX under UNIX - program invoked with a UNIX shell script written in >REXX > >Have I missed some other "normal" (not CICS, DB2 stored proc, IMS, etc) >z/OS environment. > I have one similar. Fewer environments: 2, 4, 5, 6 plus ISPF Edit command line as a macro. It needs a job ID argument which it sometimes gets (thanks, Pedro Vera, for the suggestion) by scraping an SDSF screen -- just type its member name on the command line.
> ... In a REXX environment (#s 2, 4, & 6) I plan to have a >"STEM varname." type option such as with EXECIO. > Input? Output? Kinda like BPXWUNIX? (I'm surprised how many programmers are unaware of or eschew its ddname form for stdin/stdout/stderr, given that they work beautifully. I can run BPXWUNIX with stdout and stderr directed to SYSOUT and tail them with SDSF in real time -- no buffer latency.) > ...In all environments, the >default output would be to the normal output (in batch, I consider >//SYSPRINT to be the "normal" place for program output) -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
