I was puzzled by the length of CMDBUFL ...after your explanation Walt, it's
very clear.
Thank you. I wasn't aware that a TSO parser could be called in IRREVX01 that's
a great idea..
I saw the length using an Abend macro, being on a test system I can perform
controlled tests.
We don't want our
Welcome to the list newbie.
Chuck Arney
Arney Computer Systems
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU]
On Behalf Of Meyer, Kenneth J
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2013 2:27 PM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Hi..
New to list,
a.) Ken, I am happy to have another person here that reacts to certain
postings like I do. (can you please also specify the op-sys?)
b.) Chuck- so you are back home safe.
c.) I did not dare to answer (we do not introduce here), but since it is
going now anyway
--
Martin
Pi_cap_CPU - all
It must be conceded that TRTE is newer than TRT, but it is not a
notably new instruction.
More to the point, while it is may be appropriate to supply a TRTE
macro for use on old hardware, it is not appropriate to avoid the use
of the TRTE instruction where it is available, as is now usually the
Jon and Ken did not say that they are avoiding the use of TRTE due to
unfamiliarity with the instruction. They indicated that they are
avoiding the instruction because it may not be supported on all machines
where their code must run.
Specifically, the TRTE instruction will cause an operation
As I attempted to make clear in my earlier post, this old-hardware
argument is specious. If you want to support old machines, write a
macro called TRTE for them, but use TRTE in your code. It reduces
clutter, increases readability, improves performance where the
instruction is installed, etc.,
Kenneth Meyer's formulation
begin extract
I, among many, have to support older versions of the mainframe. This
means using common instructions rather than the latest instructions.
/end extract
is admirably clear and succinct. Its only defect is that it is wrong.
If instruction INST is not
On 2013-04-13, at 15:51, John Gilmore wrote:
If instruction INST is not available on some of the machines he must
support he can write a macro definition called INST that mimics its
behavior for use on these antediluvian machines, do very much the same
thing IBM does for millicoded
Many companies do not see the depreciation interval for a purchased
mainframe to be an automatic trigger for the purchase of a new
replacement mainframe. Instead, some of them quite enjoy the lack of
hardware expenditures.
We often encounter old machines at customer sites, and must make sure
Certainly he can write such a macro. Whether it is wrong or not
depends upon, among other things, whether one of the older machines he
needs to support is the one where he must do his development and testing
work. If that is the case, then he will lack the ability to test INST on
a machine where
In your infinitesimal and lugubrious opinion.
See, we Texuns cun tawk too! (Actually originally from Ohio).
Our job is to support our customers, not to decide what they should do
because you have pronounced so from your MA ivory tower.
No one insulted you, so why do you feel a need to insult
I really appreciate the support that has been expressed. I'm really sorry others
got pulled into this and Gilmore is taking it out on you. We shouldn't let him
pull us down to his level.
We all know that John Gilmore of Assland, MA. (sorry, I meant Ashland, MA.)
loves to do this sort of thing. He
quoting John Gilmore's
I of course expected this response. Litanies in defense of the old
and familiar are recurrent here, but repetition does not make them
meritorious. They are of a piece with the suspiciously repetitive,
insular, risk-averse, mediocre notions that are ruining, have indeed
This really nails it. I will add as a developer and one who likes sales, we
don't want a dump we could have prevented - ever. Since IBM MVS, z/OS support
has been phenomenal at running load modules developed on older machines, we
love to develop code on an older machine. Except we don't get
14 matches
Mail list logo
