Jim wrote:
> DUMPRX was one of the slickest tools available for VM sysprogs in the
> '80s.  With the overall level of code quality at that time, it was really
> needed.  I have always thought that the only reason it wasn't included in
> the product was the NIH mentality that was common in IBM at that time in
> Endicott and Kingston.

re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006n.html#11 Not Your Dad's Mainframe: Little Iron

i may have alienated endicott ...  which had a whole group supporting
dumpscan (which was a large program written all in assembler). I had
made a comment that i would implement dumprx in less 3 months elapsed
time only working half time on it. It would have ten times the
function of dumpscan as well as ten times the performance. also since
this was the leading edge of the OCO-wars ... i pointed out that it
would be implemented all in REXX (except for possibly a hundred
assembler instructions) so that the source would have to be shipped.

I got all the basic stuff done early ... and since i had been building
up a knowledge base of failure scenarios ... i started a library of
dumprx/rexx routines that searched for particular classes of failure
signatures/characteristics.

it could be run either as cms terminal line-mode ... or as a xedit
rexx macro ... and then have full xedit capability for the dumprx
session

since they wouldn't ship it, i eventually got approval to give a
detailed implementation dumprx talk at SHARE ... in case anybody else
wanted to implement their own.

re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#dumprx

Reply via email to