On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 4:49 PM, Bob Cronin wrote:
> Will that do the right thing when the final terminating "." is missing, he
> wonders? Off to try it ...
What do you think could happen? How could it not do the right thing?
| Rob
On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 6:44 AM, John P. Hartmann wrote:
> callpipe *:|pick to 1-* == /./|...
A new plumbers' trick every day :-) I should have started the draft book!
Guess "to" is abbreviation for "tooth" ;-)
| Rob
On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 4:39 AM, Bob Cronin wrote:
> A BSMTP mail file can contain multiple emails separated by lines that
> consist of a single dot. I need to extract the individual emails into their
> own files. I wrote a pure Rexx filter to do it which works, but is
> excruciatingly slow for l
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 6:02 PM, Ian S. Worthington
wrote:
> Our very wonderful and charming vm admin lady also demured at having the later
> version as our default in case it broke IBM-standard tools. She was persuaded
> though to allow me to put it up on a common disk and all who want it use
>
It's Friday ;-)
http://rvdheij.wordpress.com/2010/06/25/performing-a-dirm-user-nopass/
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Alain Benveniste wrote:
> ...and what's about just executing a dirm user ?
There are many installations that have chosen not to license DIRMAINT.
With that, there's a clustered directory so even more excuse for neat
plumbing if you want to do your own :-)
Rob
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 11:47 PM, Schuh, Richard wrote:
> However, 'nfind NOLOG_' would not reject NOLOGIC. Neither would 'strnfind
> /NOLOG /'.
But lookup on the word really rocks ;-) I also like to use "3way w3"
to split the USER card, change the password, and fold the 3 pieces
together agai
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:56 PM, Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
> Don't forget that input columns can be defined in words or fields.
Which will also address the fact that 'nfind NOLOG' would also reject
things like NOLOGIC ;-)
Rob
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 7:28 AM, Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
> On Wed, 26 May 2010 20:25:50 -0500, you wrote:
>>I have rexx stage that has suddenly started giving looping alerts. A trace
>>reveals that a PEEKTO is not returning. Any thoughts?
>
> If PEEKTO hasn't returned and the pipeline hasn't
On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 5:53 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
> I mostly agree. PACK/UNPACK were designed for a reliable repository
> such as local DASD. I (and many of the followups) are targeting an
> anecdote. But lacking other tools, one of the questions tech support
> asks early is, "How many by
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
> Only about 80%, I would hope? The least denominator of 1024/80 is 5, so
> around 1/5 of the time (assuming some flattish distribution of sizes out
> past 5kB) it should come out even.
I was thinking about the padding to 1024 if you
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 2:09 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
> I used a PACK stage to make a VMFPLCD archive internet-friendly
> and sent it to a client who uploaded it to his CMS system with
> IND$FILE. Then, at my instruction, he did:
>
> PIPE < fn ft1 fm | FBLOCK 1024 | unpack | > fn ft2 fm
>
>
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Mark Wheeler wrote:
> Pipes has a WILDCARD stage, and a LOOKUP stage. Has anyone written a
> "wildcard lookup" stage, where the keys in the master records are able to
> contain wildcard characters like "*" and "%"?
>
I assume you're talking about a scheme where
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 3:51 PM, Mark Wheeler wrote:
> Single-stream with NOT:
> pipe(end ?) literal x y | split | NOT test x | specs /Pri/ 1 1-* nw|cons
> Ready; T=0.01/0.01 08:35:55
>
> Not really a surprise, but how??
I think your REXX program should also test for the primary output
being con
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 11:37 PM, Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
> Mike Walter wrote:
>> z/VM defaults don't care about the $-sign, but older VM systems and apps
>> may care about the @ (character delete) and # (linend) characters.
>
> But this is running on TSO, no VM involved.
>
>> Does the comment
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 9:05 PM, SPITZ, HOBART CTR DFAS
wrote:
> Am I the only one who doesn't know what POLISH ASSEMBLER is?
>
> Or did I miss the explanation?
:-) The "polish" stage is the expression parser that converts an
infix expression to reverse polish notation. When introduced, the only
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 2:47 PM, John P. Hartmann wrote:
> If memory serves:
>
> If you have an active SECUSER, the console output is presented there rather
> than to whatever the virtual machine would like to see.
The SECUSER deflecting the messages is annoying. You may find an
action routine in
Bummer. late again in trying the new toys...
Looking at the "fbaread" stage, I think I would have expected it
analogous to the "diskrand" style. So a range rather than two numbers.
If the Piper listens to me and changes it, you know who to blame when
your pipe breaks :-)
Rob
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 5:28 PM, Hughes, Jim wrote:
> I have need to split a single input stream into different spool files.
> The manual says I should write a null record to the PRINTMC or PUNCH
> stage for force the driver to empty its buffers before I do a CP CLOSE
> or CP SPOOL command. For c
It's Friday, so please forgive me an off-topic posting to my fellow
plumbers
http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/161532/Polish-plumber-becomes-faith-healer-after-finding-mystical-stone-
PS Note the symbolic meaning of the "Z" mentioned in the story...
Sir Rob the Plumber
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
> The key word here is "collection". VMFPLC, like VMARC will handle
> envelopes containing multiple files with different attributes.
> I don't believe netdata will do this.
Since netdata wraps each file such that you see where it ends, you
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 8:44 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
> o VMARC self-extracting archive:
> - Is there any legal liability if it damages the customer's
> system?
I feel very bad about that idea! We don't want to teach VM sysprogs
to accept gifts from strangers like that
I use VMFPLC a
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Alan Winson wrote:
> Thanks, Rob. Where can I find that paper?
On the CMS Pipelines Home Page.
http://vm.marist.edu/~pipeline/rmhlup.pdf
Rob
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 4:15 PM, Alan Winson wrote:
> about 20% more unique keys than reading one file. The lookup stage deletes
> each detail record that is added and adds a new detail record with the same
> key (and the updated sums). I guess the reason that storage grows is either
I'll sit
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 1:07 AM, Alan Winson wrote:
> 3. I would expect the pipe to use the same amount of storage no matter how
> many files are read. Those records should move through the pipe one at a
> time, right? They are detail input to lookup, not master input. The pipe
> works fine wh
On Sat, Feb 6, 2010 at 12:44 AM, Michael Harding wrote:
> Rob, I'm surprised. What if the number is 002004, for example?
My apologies... I must have gotten a heavy pipe on my head ;-)
strip | strip leading /0/ | pad 1 0
Rob (off to do something about that headache)
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 8:01 PM, Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
> "Frank M. Ramaekers" wrote:
>> (like COBOL PIC ZZ9)? (I thought I remembered a PIC(TURE)
>> specification
>
> Very nearly--PICTURE is part of a PRINT spec. You have to read the
> value into a field first:
>
> ... | specs a: 1-*
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 1:14 PM, DUGALEIX Michaël
wrote:
> For example :
> "pipe ahelp <" mentions : Placement: "<" must be a first stage.
> "pipe ahelp >" mentions : Placement: ">" must not be a first stage.
You're right. I completely overlooked that.
I can't think of many device drivers that
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 11:20 AM, DUGALEIX Michaël
wrote:
> But I would never have thought of your second solution (I thought "diskrand"
> had to be the first stage in a pipeline; In fact, I never really noticed the
> "Placement" note in the stages' help; The placements are not as obvious as I
>
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 9:40 AM, DUGALEIX Michaël
wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I'd like to take a sample of a big "real" file (each line of the file having
> the same structure) to test some programs, by putting in my sample only the
> lines (for example) 1, 1001, 2001, 3001, ...
> (1) something like
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 5:02 PM, John P. Hartmann wrote:
> DISKfast fpldscep 4
>
> That is, you want to say DISKSLOW in full.
Why would one need diskslow? DISKFAST does the rename trick fine as well?
pipe < not here | count lines | cons
PIPDSR146E File "NOT HERE *" does not exist.
PIPSCA003
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 4:55 PM, Frank M. Ramaekers
wrote:
> This will fail when 'ExecFn "Log A"' does not exist. Is there a way
> around this (outside of a "STATE" and "IF" statement and two pipelines
> depending on the existence fo a log file.)
Use "disk" rather than "<" to silently ignore a
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 4:14 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>> This is cheating. Sure, if you assume the operating system has the
>> right time, you just ask there...
>>
> So it's cheating to ask your own OS, but not cheating to ask
> a remote OS? What if your system lacks network connection?
You jus
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 4:18 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
> Will VM _ever_ learn to use ETR, STP, whatever? Last I heard it
> couldn't,
> much less being leap second aware. Causes us problems with z/OS guests.
Sorry, you must be listening to the wrong folks. z/VM will enjoy the
steering of the TOD
On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 10:50 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
> Is there a stage that talks to OpenEdition CMS? (I have _no_
> experience with OpenEdition CMS.) If so, all that's necessary
> is to capture the output of "TZ=GMT0 date".
>
> (In TSO it's easy enough with "address SYSCALL".)
This is chea
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 5:24 PM, Frank M. Ramaekers
wrote:
> I'm having some problems with a pipeline that process either STARMSG or
> CONSOLE input. When an SMSG is received it acts unexpectedly:
Use a "gate" after the "starmsg" - when you fire a record into that,
it terminates the pipeline
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 7:30 AM, Kris Buelens wrote:
> As for the original problem here: it is supposed to filter SCIF messages, so
> I guess it is in a long running server, so keeping the files open until the
> servers stops is probably not a good idea. So either EXECIO or FILESLOW
> with a FIN
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 9:56 PM, Hughes, Jim wrote:
> A sipping pipeline maybe. Call this stage for each SCIF message.
When you expect a fair amount of messages for a relatively small
number of files, it may be more fun to spawn a little prefix pipeline
for each recipient:
do forever
'peekto
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 3:19 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
> 'inmr123' locnode uft_id su_fn su_ft su_fm,
> 401 line(s) not displayed
> * * * End of File * * *
>
> I have no idea what might be a local mod.
No, it's true. And I'm surprised as well. But
I have some pipeline refinery that must parse assembler statements
into its components. I pick records with a quote in that particular
word and for those revert to parsing fields (where quote is the field
separator). The one that bit were things like L'SYMBOL so I had to
pick the records where the
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 12:16 AM, Michael Harding wrote:
> You don't say, but I'm guessing you first establish yourself as secuser for
> EREP. While the HCP150A is sent to the secuser on behalf of the target, it
> isn't SCIF output since it isn't sent to the target's console. Have you
> tried al
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 6:24 PM, Frank M. Ramaekers
wrote:
> Well, I broke it:
>
> PIPDSK078E Record length 135474 is too much.
>
I don't think it writes to disk itself.. so it must have been your own
action to blindly write what it outputs. For inclusion in a pipeline
package it will be folded i
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 10:47 AM, Shimon Lebowitz wrote:
> Sorry about the delay.
> I looked a bit till I found it, but on my 5.3 system,
> the stage you mention seems to be:
> FPLCMPRX REXX S2 V 71 234 2
> 4/13/07 8:23:38
Ah. Yes, that's it. This one has some improv
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 10:53 PM, Schuh, Richard wrote:
> I forgot to mention, CMPRREXX is/was a REXX filter from IBM at least as early
> as VMESA 2.1.0. I don't know where it lives today, except for the copy on my
> Tools disk, that is.
It is shipped with CMS to the 190 disk. If you can't fin
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 5:19 PM, DUGALEIX Michaël
wrote:
> Hello Franck,
>
> It does exist : http://vm.marist.edu/~pipeline/bhelp/ACH0193.html
>
> But I think it's quite new.
You know the Linux folks get very upset when I use the term "recent"
for something that was introduced in '83 :-) I don't
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Frank M. Ramaekers wrote:
> Is there something equivalent to SPACE(variable) or SPACE(variable,1) in
> PIPEs?
> (Make sure there is ONLY 1 space between each word?)
You may guess once how it would be called :-)
Operation: Leading and trailing delimiters are r
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Michael Harding wrote:
> While all-pipes solutions are usually elegant and always inherently cool,
> either Bob's or the Piper's could be a challenge to build dynamically. I'd
> probably use one or the other - or something similar - for a fixed case,
> but I think
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 8:12 PM, Frank M.
Ramaekers wrote:
> I need something like a PARSE (REXX) for PIPEs. Take the following
> example:
>
> Data:
> 7000 CUTYPE = 2107-E8, DEVTYPE = 3390-0C, VOLSER =, CYLS = 30051
> 06FE CUTYPE = 2107-E8, DEVTYPE = 3390-0A, VOLSER = 540RES, CYLS = 3339
> 7001
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 3:58 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
> o It's atomic: the operation is synchronized to guarantee
> that no concurrent process can pereive the absence of
> the replaced file. (I.e. no "RC=28" timing window
> for shared files.) But I'm most familiar with MDFS;
> perhaps the
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 11:26 AM, Michaël
Dugaleix wrote:
> Is there any risk in reading from a file and writing into the same one
> ('pipe (...) < myFile | ... | > myFile') ?
> I mean : May my original file be corrupted ?
> Supposing that :
> - there's no bug in my OS (z/VM)
> - there's no bug in
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 7:38 AM, John P. Hartmann wrote:
> The web server is not particularly reliable, but Marist has not been
> IPLed since January.
Can't I just have a day off without you folks complain about a free
service from Marist College... Since CMSPIP-L is also hosted by
Marist on th
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Bob Cronin wrote:
> Can anyone suggest a reason why RITA would report all times as zero
> for a very long running pipeline?
Will be fixed in 110B0021
For the time being you may be able to get away with an older version from 2008.
Rob
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 9:09 PM, Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
> With about a half-million master records (numbers up to a million with a
> 1 in them, split between numbers with and without zeroes) and a thousand
> detail records (square numbers up to a million), it worked out about 5%
> slower, but i
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 4:29 PM, John P. Hartmann wrote:
> Are you discriminating against contractors? If both of them are
> there, shouldn't they get the message both, particularly if they are
> different persons?
But if you need to weed out any duplicates, you can tag the original
input records
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 7:39 AM, John P. Hartmann wrote:
> What the heart is full of... Rob meant TOTARGET LOCATE 1. And he
> really should mean PICK TO 1 == // (a null string).
No, I meant to consume up to the first null string. I believe NLOCATE
1 is what I need to match that record. So TOTARG
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 1:29 AM, Bob Cronin wrote:
> I did add a null record, but I don't have a "TOTARGET NOT LOOKUP 1", I
> am still using the COUNT and using the alternate output as the
> mechanism to terminate the GATE that the records being fed to the
> primary input of LOOKUP flow through on t
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 11:20 PM, Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
> Actually, because it delays the record, your solution has the same
> problem. The alternate output of TAKE LAST may be written anytime after
> the last record on the primary is released, just the same as the
> alternate output of COUNT
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 10:10 PM, Bob Cronin wrote:
> Oh and as regards COUNT not being the right solution, it does seem to
> work though. Maybe I missed your alternative (or didn't understand
> it). Could you show a simple example of how do do it right that even I
> can understand? Or, re-point me
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 9:52 PM, Bob Cronin wrote:
> Yes it does. So the reason for the COUNT stage is that COUNT will
> terminate when all the input records have been exhausted regardless of
> whats going on between FANINTWO and LOOKUP. Nice ...
Which is why COUNT is not the right solution. There'
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 9:50 PM, Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
> You need something to sever LOOKUP's primary input at EOF. As long as
> it's still feeding back to itself, it can never terminate. The simplest
> way I've come up with is to feed the alternate output of COUNT to GATE.
> That avoids mak
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 8:50 PM, Bob Cronin wrote:
> I must still be missing something because that did not help. Here's the
> snippet:
Lookup wants to output the unmatched detail through the secondary
before it reads the next detail on the primary input. And as I said,
you need "fanintwo" to feed
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Bob Cronin wrote:
> Is there a way to take detail records that were not found in the
> reference, modify them and then feed them back into the same lookup?
Sure, you probably want "fanintwo" with that, and maybe a "copy" stage.
> For example let's say I am looking
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 12:29 AM, Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
> Since it's for IBM internal use, I guess PATTERN can handle the quotes
> and comments (though my old COMMENT PATTERN doesn't quite fit the bill).
I don't speak SMP so I can't very well picture the pain you're in.
But maybe this one is
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 6:32 PM, Russ wrote:
> I suspect our Pipes are are not current as I can't reference to "c2t" in our
> PIPE AHELP SPEC.
> What does it do?
Converts 8 byte TOD clock to readable format. Just get the Runtime
Library from the Pipelines home page. The indoor plumbing is more th
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 9:57 PM, Bob Cronin wrote:
> Is there a way to coax the TimeStamp stage to render the timestamps it
> produces in UTC? At present I am doing local-to-UTC conversion using some
> laborious Rexx code and found myself wishing for something more efficient
maybe? spec tod c2t 1
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Rod Furey wrote:
> An IF topology NEVER makes sense :-)
Yeah. If Melinda were still doing Pipes, I would certainly get flamed
for promoting that.. .
Guess you don't appreciate the topology around "throttle" either ;-)
"Look, multi-stream with no stage separators"
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Ian S.
Worthington wrote:
>> a label names a stage, not a connection point.
>
> I strongly suspect that *that's* the concept I muddled. I *was* thinking
> about them as connection points whilst writing this.
When you have that right, this one makes sense as well:
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 11:22 PM, Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
> --and you're still stuck buffering at least all the unmatched records,
> and fighting with input 3 of LOOKUP to delete the matched ones.
But you still don't have the buffer the full input.
Be aware that deleting the keys from lookup
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 4:57 PM, Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
> * If the START record can come *after* the records you want to
> match with it, you're stuck. You can't identify which records you
> want until you get to the end of the file, so you'll have to read the
> whole thing twice.
No
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 1:54 AM, Ian S.
Worthington wrote:
> Redirecting the fanout via ?dup0:|add0: was the bit I was missing. I often
> seem to stumble on that occasional requirement: is there any guidance
> anywhere about when its required and when its not, and how to do it right? I
> had t
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 11:01 PM, Ian S.
Worthington wrote:
> What I don't appear to be able to get right is the trivial bit: Files STARTLU
> and START000 need to be fanned together into a single file, but all my
> attempts to do so seem to end in label redefinition hell. Anyone care to
> restore
Would it be an idea to have these discussions somewhere else? I don't
mind the occasional announcement, but I don't think many CMS Pipelines
want to follow this in detail.
-Rob
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 11:22 PM, Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
> Wherever columns differ, I want to see the words in one record or the
> other (or both) that contain those columns. Where the different
> character is a blank, I'm not sure what I'd want to see.
That's the part that troubled me. If y
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
> Often I use combinations of COMBINE X and XLATE to show the changed
> columns in a record. Usually what I'd really like is to show the whole
> word that includes the changed column. For instance:
So the words are as aligned as you sh
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 3:04 PM, Kris Buelens wrote:
> Make that
> Since "spec" uses "stop alleof"
Yes, I was suffering from some auto-lobotomy. But at least it was just
the explanation that failed.
> and I'll agree with that solution, grand in simplicity.
:-)
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 3:24 AM, Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
> What I really want in the case at hand is to take two files, and pad the
> shorter one to contain as many records as the longer one. I happen to
> know the lengths in advance, but it would be nice to have a way that
> didn't require tha
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 7:38 AM, John P. Hartmann wrote:
> Try this (untested):
>
> LOOKUP AUTOADD COUNT gives you the first one trivially. At
> end-of-file you have the last one on the tertiary output. (You need
> the COUNT option to see them all.) Discard the ones with a count of 1
> as you'v
ave something like this:
cmd = 'EXEC SENDFILE' ; uid = 'PRINCE AT LARGE'
'PIPE < listof files | spec .cmd 1 w1.3 nw .uid nw | command | cons'
Rob
--
Rob van der Heij
Velocity Software
http://www.velocitysoftware.com/
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 8:47 PM, SPITZ, HOBART CTR DFAS
wrote:
> The canonical way to handle data in a REXX variable in a delimiter
> independent manner is:
Or feed the data in a secondary input and combine the two with juxtapose or so?
Rob
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 11:57 PM, Mike Walter wrote:
> BTW, wouldn't best coding practices imply a change of the 'CMS' stages to
> 'COMMAND' stages (with all uppercase arguments)?
> Pity of someone has their own 'LISTDIR' or 'QUERY' exec on an accessed
> disk. Yes, that's a VERY bad practice - bu
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 9:07 PM, Ian S. Worthington
wrote:
> I live in hope that one day someone will show me a better way of coding this
> kind of thing.
How could one resist the temptation...
I'm not entirely sure what the purpose of that snippet of plumbing
is... but I believe it does this:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 6:01 PM, SPITZ, HOBART CTR DFAS
wrote:
> Would it be feasible to support a name default, using REXX parse source
> and sigl information as above, on each pipe/callpipe/addpipe without a
> name option?
>
> Do anyone else like this idea?
Probably makes sense. I can't think
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Alan Altmark wrote:
> We use filetype SAMP to indicate that the item is not a
> supported/documented part of the product, but is something we provide for
> you to use. Sometimes the point is the source, demonstrating how to do
> something, and other times it
On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 11:28 PM, Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
> "Schuh, Richard" wrote:
>> Maybe you ought to consider cannibalizing PIPEDEMO.
>
> Ugh, scanning for escaped pipeline characters in REXX is exactly what I
> hoped to avoid. Oh, well.
I would think that you can leave the first part (b
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 7:08 PM, Shimon Lebowitz wrote:
> I once wasted several days trying to get two machines running
> pipes to send a simple message via TCPIP back and forth.
> According to the article I had read (perhaps by Rob? I don't
> really remember) it was supposed to be a piece of cake,
On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 12:00 AM, Kris Buelens wrote:
> I used this construct
> |Hdr: Fanout|take|SPEC /blabla/ 1
> |Out: Fanin|Cons
> ?Hdr:|Out:
I think this is 'ifnotempty' so something like this:
| frst: take 1 | append literal Header | take | i: faninany | ...
\ frst: | i:
But yes, it is
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
> I'm not talking about poorly-behaved or malicious programs. I'm talking
> about perfectly ordinary things like SENDFILE EXEC using Diag(8, 'CLOSE
> PUN') to capture the file sent message. That was the very first thing I
> tried to c
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 9:27 PM, Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
> Not quite. There's not a trivial way to know if some other program has
> messed with the IMSG setting while it had control, or captured the
> arrival message in sending a file to itself. You could, of course,
> inject periodic querie
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 6:32 PM, Bob Cronin wrote:
> Indeed, which is why I am a bit down on using anything that relies on
> looking for IMSG's to know when a reader file has arrived. Pity there's no
> WAKEUP pipe stage ...
Well, starmsg is just that... doing a Q RDR * ALL to mimic the events
a
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 4:56 PM, Donald Russell
wrote:
> The portion of the primary record I'm trying to select on is an MVS
> file name, while the master records are leading dataset qualifiers.
> The desired effect being... give me a list of dataset names beginning
> with HLQ1.Q2. or HLQ3.Q4.Q5
As others concluded, lookup does not match partial keys. It has been
on my wish list for some time, but it would certainly complicate a lot
of the other functions of lookup (how about when the abbreviations are
not unique, would you could the match of the stem or of the
abbreviation, etc).
One way
On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 8:19 PM, Glenn Knickerbocker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So the pitcher really doesn't ever delay the record at all, but the
> catcher may delay it indefinitely, right?
I'm not sure what you mean. The idea is that a pipeline segment like this
.. | warp test \ warp test |
On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 2:21 PM, Glenn Knickerbocker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Dec 2008 09:39:26 +0100, John wrote:
>>In the meanwhile I've also fixed a loop in the dispatcher when a
>>pipeline with a warp stalls.
>
> Wait, "with a warp"? You added that long-requested time travel stag
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 8:46 PM, Mike Walter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Short of scanning all files with filetype EXEC or REXX (potentially
> missing pipes in filetypes of other names), I don't know of a means to
> pre-emptively identify if we have "lots of strings in counters."
Being able to st
On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 2:55 PM, Glenn Knickerbocker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If the list of domain names is large, you can at least split it up by
> length so you have only one LOOKUP per key length. Now, is there a
> simpler way to do that than using SPECS V2C to insert the length?
Although
On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 1:16 AM, Mike Walter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Have you considered the WILDCARD stage?
Unfortunately it would take a wildcard stage per domain name you want
to match. That gets unattractive for a large number of domains. I'm
sure I must have suggested the Piper to suppor
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 10:11 PM, Bob Cronin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a list of domain names, e.g. "geodis.de lenovo.com att.com", etc.
>
> I have another list of (malformed) email addresses, e.g. "bcgeodis.de
> mfclenovo.com rrcatt.com", etc.
>
> I want to (somehow) use the list of domai
On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 1:21 AM, Jack Woehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Okay, I dood it and we'll see if anyone hollers about it:
>
> http://dobbscodetalk.com/index.php?option=com_myblog&show=Pipes-vs-Pipelines.html&Itemid=29
I made that picture, so I would be the only one to object...
-Rob
On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 2:16 AM, Paul Gilmartin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> CMS Pipelines is trickier. I believe it simulates the appearance
> of concurrency, but is it truly concurrent? That is, if my
> system has multiple CPUs and I code a pipeline with parallel
> stages, will Pipelines employ
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:09 PM, Russel Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I tried your suggestion, which expanded to "literal F8C2 ..." and Pipe
> crashed with...
Right. If you wanted to inject a 8B carriage control it should have been
| strliteral x8b
But "| literal 1 " before the "asatomc"
401 - 500 of 599 matches
Mail list logo
