On 17/05/2012 2:06 AM, Tom Marchant wrote:
On Tue, 15 May 2012 20:07:52 +, Robert Prins wrote:
maybe a 16-byte
three-instruction sequence like
003FC0 E310 DF10 0158 003120 | LY r1,a1:d7952:l4(,r13,7952)
003FC6 E300 1047 0015 003120 | LGH r0,_shadow20(,r1,71)
003FCC 4000 E064
Robert,
I'm no expert but I have read that newer hardware models (Z10 and above)
are essentially RISC processors that run complex instructions in
millicode. In the
case of a MVC instruction it would have to do that in a loop which would
require branching, the enemy of pipelined exeuction
On 14/05/2012 8:29 PM, McKown, John wrote:
Agree. Most people, especially US, would likely consider CP-037 to be the z/OS code
page because that is the only one supported by JCL, and the main one for COBOL. z/OS UNIX
seems to like IBM-1047 which is generally compatible with CP-037 (other than
On 11/05/2012 8:41 PM, Shane Ginnane wrote:
On Fri, 11 May 2012 07:29:50 -0500, McKown, John wrote:
But, wait! There is a solution! Dovetailed Technologies
By jove, that fella must be on a good percentage of the sale price of that
software ... ;-)
You really are a cheeky monkey Shane!
On 11/05/2012 9:41 PM, Shane Ginnane wrote:
On Fri, 11 May 2012 21:20:34 +0800, David Crayford wrote:
... - but you can't knock *free* software on z/OS, especially
when it's of the quality that Dovestail churn.
Perish the thought.
I don't believe I've ever disparaged Kirk or their software
On 10/05/2012 8:20 AM, George Henke wrote:
ty, David, for the interesting point of view, but it certainly does
conflict with the comparison numbers IBM showed at the zEnterprise Summit.
That's not really surprising considering the actors involved! For a
lucid perspective you may want to
read
On 9/05/2012 3:20 PM, Shane Ginnane wrote:
On Wed, 9 May 2012 12:29:31 +0800, David Crayford wrote:
What IBM didn't mention in the Z Summit was that offloading I/O to
peripheral hardware hasn't been
exclusive to mainframes for a very long time.
Careful Dave, you're starting to sound like
On 8/05/2012 1:25 PM, Timothy Sipples wrote:
One point I'd like to highlight is that a zBX is *not* simply another blade
server chassis. One of the key reasons it's not the same is the zEnterprise
Unified Resource Manager (URM). For example, URM is able to coordinate
resource allocations and
On 5/05/2012 2:55 AM, George Henke wrote:
tyvm, John, Mark, Edward.
Mark,
Do I need an Enterprise Class z114 box or will a Business Class one suffice?
John,
A compelling reason for server consolidation on zBx as IBM pointed out in
their z Summit is that zMIPS GCPs are totally dedicated to
On 7/05/2012 8:49 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Sun, 6 May 2012 15:26:33 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:
I have z/OS tasks of all stripes driving a z/OS system exit. I have a finite
supply of a resource that each task needs in the exit. Sometimes the
resources are exhausted and will not be
program?
I don't see any examples in the P/G you linked to either. What am I missing?
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of David Crayford
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 8:20 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Does C
The book also has examples and you will find full samples in the
SCBCSAMP data set.
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/zvm/v5r4/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.zos.r9.cbcpx01/cbcpg18096.htm
On 2/05/2012 9:58 AM, Charles Mills wrote:
Thanks!
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM
snip
http://proceedings.share.org/client_files/SHARE_in_San_Jose/S8133EJ131525.pdf
That's a very interesting presentation. If I were coding in assembler I
would follow! If IBM had made PL/X generally available would you have
used that, or still used assembler?
Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of David Crayford
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2012 6:25 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: IBM C/C++ Productivity Tools for OS/390
I looked into the product a few years ago and it wasn't available via
partnerworld. It's mostly
On Fri, 20 Apr 2012 11:18:45 +0800, David Crayford dcrayf...@gmail.com
wrote:
Of course, fcntl() can be used to implement byte-range-locking. So in
theory you could use it to implement
row-level locking in a dictionary library. ENQ is not that granular.
ENQ is as granular
I looked into the product a few years ago and it wasn't available via
partnerworld. It's mostly been deprecated by RDz. I was mostly interested in
the profiler.
On 21/04/2012, at 7:28 AM, Charles Mills charl...@mcn.org wrote:
The current (V1R13) LE Concepts Guide refers to the IBM C/C++
On 19/04/2012 10:50 PM, Michael Klaeschen wrote:
I do not agree to Paul's answer. flockfile() only relates to file
descriptors. Opening another file descriptor for the same file will not be
in scope of that particular lock. Instead you might consider BPX1FCT with
the BPXYBRLK mapping structure.
I personally wouldn't use Metal-C for writing exits. Unless they are
very simple structures the DSECT conversion utility is painful due to
the ambiguous syntax of assembler data declarations. It takes a best
guess, which sometimes works and sometimes makes a horrible mess.
If IBM provided C
On 14/04/2012 12:24 AM, Tony Harminc wrote:
snip
But it may be that when writing high performance assembler routines it
is now a lot harder to win a battle with a compiler that has advanced
knowledge of the underlying machine internals.
Tony H.
On 14/04/2012 12:24 AM, Tony Harminc wrote:
On 13 April 2012 10:23, Kirk Wolfk...@dovetail.com wrote:
It is also interesting (to me) to point out that Metal C uses the same
back-end.
One would think so, but I'm not so sure...
Metal-C generates assembler code which is not dependent on the C
On 14/04/2012 12:51 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2012 00:13:31 +0800, David Crayford wrote:
I personally wouldn't use Metal-C for writing exits. Unless they are
very simple structures the DSECT conversion utility is painful due to
the ambiguous syntax of assembler data declarations
On 14/04/2012 1:02 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2012 00:44:19 +0800, David Crayford wrote:
What I find the most disappoinging about that list is it forces you to
FLOAT(IEEE)! How useful is that for most assembler programs? I suppose
it's to keep the size of the runtime down
to only
On 14/04/2012 1:38 AM, Edward Jaffe wrote:
On 4/12/2012 9:03 AM, David Crayford wrote:
AFAIK, the PL/X compiler shares a back-end with the other code
optimizers, so should produce excellent code.
Not yet.
So does that mean that the PL/X compiler produces inferior code to the
Metal/C
On 14/04/2012 1:49 AM, Lloyd Fuller wrote:
INLINE when OPTIMIZE(0) is in effect
All suboptions of INLINE
Doesn't the use ofmetal/builtins.h negate the useful of INLINE?
Lloyd
No. Inline is used for inlining small funtions to remove the linkage
overhead of subroutine calls.
-
On 14/04/2012 2:10 AM, Edward Jaffe wrote:
On 4/13/2012 10:46 AM, David Crayford wrote:
On 14/04/2012 1:38 AM, Edward Jaffe wrote:
On 4/12/2012 9:03 AM, David Crayford wrote:
AFAIK, the PL/X compiler shares a back-end with the other code
optimizers, so should produce excellent code.
Not yet
Ditto! Good work Kirk.
On 12/04/2012, at 1:13 AM, Steve Comstock st...@trainersfriend.com wrote:
[Top posting]
Terri - congratulations! Big process but you persevered.
Kirk - I'd like to commend you for the masterly way you
led Terri through the process. One of the best
AFAIK, the PL/X compiler shares a back-end with the other code
optimizers, so should produce excellent code. The compiler team is in
Toronto and I was lucky enough to talk to a few at Share in Orlando.
As it stands z/OS needs to run on machines as old as a z/800. So the
architecture level
On 13/04/2012 12:45 AM, McKown, John wrote:
Now that you mention it, I remember that the C/C++ compiler has a architecture
option to control the instructions generated. I should have known that the PL/X
compiler would too. I didn't know that they both share the same back-end. I
wish that the
Make sure you are using the right codepage. Are you sure you are running
the shell in 1047? looks like it may be 037 judging by the mangled
square brackets
On 10/04/2012 10:46 PM, Shaffer, Terri E wrote:
Hi Kirk,
Not sure about the extra asterisks, I copied your example at the beginning
On 29/02/2012 8:44 PM, John Gilmore wrote:
The table involved is short; it is ordered; it can be searched using
very efficient glb-seeking binary search; this table grows very
slowly;
Wouldn't a perfect hash algorithm be quicker?
John Gilmore, Ashland, MA 01721 - USA
On 15/02/2012 2:11 AM, Charles Mills wrote:
Does anyone know of a way to get the XLC compiler to list all of the #define
symbols that are in effect? XREF and ATTR list all ordinary symbols. There
are several ways of course of determining the define state of any
particular #define symbol. But
On 31/01/2012 12:27 PM, Charles Mills wrote:
BTW, it will want to be a .C (upper case) file to compile it with the IBM C
compiler.
I use *.cpp extensions. Either use the -+ compiler option, set the
_CXX_CXXSUFFIX environment
variable or set up a stanza in the compiler configuration file.
On 13/12/2011 6:48 AM, John Gilmore wrote:
I was aware of the presence of ALLOCATE and FREE in the 'new' COBOL standard
This thread has wandered far from its initial topic, and perhaps it is
time to let it expire quietly. Frank likes variable-length tables. I
agree that self-defining tables
On 8/09/2011 4:03 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Wed, 7 Sep 2011 12:15:33 -0500, McKown, John wrote:
Use POSIX threading instead of ATTACH? The semantics seem to be different in
that there is no parent-child relationship.
I had thought z/OS implements threads as tasks, so fork() would be
If you're using Java I assume you're using JZOS right? In that case just
call the ZFile.getFilename() method.
On 5/09/2011 5:11 PM, Michael Knigge wrote:
Hi,
I'm looking for a way to get the pathname/filename of a DD (specifying
a PATH not a DD) at runtime I tried to get it out of the
On 23/08/2011 4:04 PM, Shane wrote:
On Mon, 22 Aug 2011 11:27:08 -0400 Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
or even computer science back then,
There were CS departments in the late 1960's.
But they weren't all offering degrees - even into the 70's.
I had to do a Science degree majoring in
Are there any monitoring tools that can show the complete transaction
life history through, for example, a zLinux WAS server into z/OS
CICS/DB2/IMS etc.
There seems to be a boundary where the two worlds are quite separate as
far as instrumentation data. I attended to a CIM session at SHARE and
Sent from my iPhone
On 20/08/2011, at 5:27 AM, R.S. r.skoru...@bremultibank.com.pl wrote:
W dniu 2011-08-19 10:07, Jim Thomas pisze:
Folks,
Why does everybody insist on overlooking the obvious ??.
The hell with how quickly you apply fixes.
Agreed.
MVS (or OS/390 or z/OS or whatever
On 8/07/2011 12:48 PM, William Smith wrote:
I'm interested in sharing information, tools, tips, techniques on using the Dignus Systems/ASM 1.85 cross assembler with Windows 7 Professional for use on z/OS 1.12 (z/196).
The Dignus web site makes reference to using Visual Studio as an integrated
Why are we even talking about VPs? The z196 has OOO which enables HPC in
any language.
On 1/07/2011 10:36 AM, Rick Fochtman wrote:
Ed Gould wrote:
All the google searches are mute (or Cost $$$)
As to the mega flops the facility had. Anyone have the numbers?
Sorry to ask these semi off
On 3/06/2011 9:20 PM, Bernd Oppolzer wrote:
Hello David,
yes, we are using EDCXSTRL. But anyway:
iconv is part of the RTL runtime package, this is a large module
called CEESG003. Part of this module is the RTL malloc routine, too.
The references between the two are already resolved, so the RTL
Bernd,
I don't understand how iconv() could be calling the RTL malloc() when
the binder should have only included the SPC malloc from SCEESPC.
I assume that you are using EDCXSTRL and not EDCXSTRT?
On 2/06/2011 3:22 PM, Bernd Oppolzer wrote:
Hello,
we have the following problem:
we
On 1/06/2011 2:29 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Tue, 31 May 2011 23:48:41 -0500, Jim Thomas wrote:
Ma'am,
Personally ... I'd like to see a suit between Microdaft and IBM.
Ummm... Which snake can open its jaws wider?
Last time they had a big scrap Microsoft ended up the winner! Anybody
It's not just OOO that gives optimized compilers an advantage over
manually crafted assembler. It's been true since zArchitecture that to
write highly effecient code one needs knowledge of the pipeline There
was a redbook when the zArch machines z/800 z/900 came out
that mentions the
On 1/06/2011 12:13 AM, Kirk Wolf wrote:
The IBM C compiler would generate an MVC loop. So, that's how IBM feels I
guess.
And when the length is a constant it generates multiple MVC instructions
to eliminate branches. Kind of like
loop unrolling.
*
*char input[528];
*
*memcpy(
LE pthread functions are mapped to names starting with @@PT*. You can
see this by browing pthread.h and checking the #pragma map(pthread, ...
) statements.
I would suggest that you are calling a pthread function that is not
declared. Because you're using the pre-linker you should check to
On 18/05/2011 9:12 AM, Ron Hawkins wrote:
Well everyone, this LISTSERV has been hijacked by one contributor and is now
bordering on the ridiculous. Good day and good luck to all those I have
debated, agreed with, and most importantly learnt from for the last 14
years, but It's farewell from me.
On 22/04/2011 12:59 PM, Chris Mason wrote:
John
The *issue* here is that IBM - and possibly other vendors - when dealing with
socket calls - that's socket calls in general not just the actual socket() call
-
just seem not to be comprehensive in documenting all possible return codes
(errnos)
On 20/04/2011 12:14 PM, Sam Siegel wrote:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 8:37 PM, Ed Gouldps2...@yahoo.com wrote:
http://www.networkworld.com/supp/2011//041811-windows-7-crashes.html
This article is a How to for taking dumps and other debugging activity on
a
windows machine.
I do not know if I want
On 5/04/2011 5:08 AM, Tony Harminc wrote:
On 4 April 2011 16:27, Jim Mulderd10j...@us.ibm.com wrote:
snip
Perhaps naturally, the attitudes of our own support people and
developers follow to some extent. These attitudes clash when one of
our components that runs on z/OS UNIX is in the
Another gem from Barbara! I love the way she starts her post's with
don't get me started and then starts and finishes with such aplomb!
On 23/03/2011 1:50 PM, Barbara Nitz wrote:
Dataspaces have been around for just a little while - then there is all
that room
above the (not so) new-fangled
On 17/03/2011 6:54 PM, Martin Packer wrote:
Note printf() goes to stdout and there isn't really such a STANDARD thing
in z/OS.
In a non-zUnix environment stdout is SYSPRINT. So in TSO it writes to
the terminal and in batch to a SYSPRINT DD. If you
don't specify a SYSPRINT DD it will
gil,
I think you misunderstood my point. I was talking about printf() and
where it routes it's output.
On 17/03/2011 8:24 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 19:31:22 +0800, David Crayford wrote:
In a non-zUnix environment stdout is SYSPRINT. So in TSO it writes to
the terminal
ListIBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
gil,
I think you misunderstood my point. I was talking about printf() and
where it routes it's output.
On 17/03/2011 8:24 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 19:31:22 +0800, David Crayford wrote:
In a non-zUnix environment stdout is SYSPRINT. So in TSO
On 4/03/2011 4:53 PM, Shane Ginnane wrote:
I'm with Jim on this - don't see the (full) requirement.
I've always been ambivalent to XML, but the RMF CIM provider(s) certainly
showed it's potential.
Have you had a bad experience with RMF CIM? If so please share...
That's about as much as I
On 17/02/2011 11:33 PM, Edward Jaffe wrote:
On 2/16/2011 1:45 PM, Stone, Sandy wrote:
Simply clicking IBM Service Request takes us back to the search
window, not the results list window.
Sorry. I misread the question.
I use Alt+Left in Firefox. This is similar in function to a) taking
your
On 5/02/2011 12:38 AM, Charles Mills wrote:
@Kirk: I looked at it. I played a little with the in-line TRT to replace an
strchr() or similar. I did not see any performance improvement and backed it
out. (Note *I did not see* a performance improvement; not there was no ...
It may have been below
On 5/02/2011 10:56 AM, john gilmore wrote:
outer: do . . . ;
. . .
inner: do . . . ;
. . .
innermost: do . . . ;
. . .
leave ; /* leaves innermost */
. . .
leave outer ;
. . .
end innermost ;
. . .
end inner ;
. . .
end outer ;
On 30/12/2010 8:02 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
You can make a tarball on Windows? With what utility? (Not
that that would be meaningful to me.) When you list the directory
of that tarball, are the pathnames truncated or intact? If intact,
the problem is on the z/OS side (or a compatibility
Bernd Oppolzer wrote:
john gilmore schrieb:
declare (pi value(3.14159_26535_89793_23846),
sqrt_pi value(sqrt(pi)) binary float(52) ;
What I find most interesting in this example:
will the sqrt(pi) function call be evaluated at compile time?
I hope so.
I doubt that any optimizer
Barbara Nitz wrote:
Do you happen to know if SAS/C had access to the PDSE macro interfaces
()? That may be how SAS/C does it. As far as I know, these interfaces
allow you to replace or delete a member, as they provide the equivalent
services to the (PDS) macros like STOW.
Yep,
Barbara Nitz wrote:
Yep, they have a low-level I/O library for BSAM etc
http://support.sas.com/documentation/onlinedoc/sasc/doc/lr2/lrv2ch3.htm.
Pretty simple stuff. Most vendors that use IBM C/C++ have written their
own similar low level I/O library.
PDS's low-level access method is
Etienne Thijsse wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 12:23:10 -0500, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com
wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 11:02:24 -0500, Etienne Thijsse wrote:
If I use the C function remove() to remove a member from a PDSE, then from
that moment on, the PDSE is locked, ISPF says in
Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 22:06:18 +, john gilmore wrote:
Yes, 61, which is prime, is better than 64 = 2^6, which is composite.
...
If division-method hashing is used a prime divisor/modulus is highly desirable.
Clustering at the prime divisors of a composite modulus
Rick Fochtman wrote:
---snip---
It depends on one's perception of trivial. Volume 3 of Knuth's Art
of Computer Programming has a very simple algorithm for building
balanced trees.
Phil Smith III wrote:
We have a largish batch LE C application that runs in POSIX mode. For
performance optimization, we're rewriting a couple of routines in assembler. So
far so good.
Here's the kicker: the application is 31-bit, but needs to use 64-bit registers
(for large integer math).
Try something like this. In REXX for simplification.
ztdtop = 0
do forever
TBSKIP TABNAME(ztdtop)
TBDISPL TABNAME PANEL(TBPANEL)
if rc 0 then leave
end
Gerry Anstey wrote:
Hi, I have a program that reads some data and creates a table using the TBx
services. All is mostly ok but I
R.S. wrote:
W dniu 2010-06-03 00:52, Kevin Keith pisze:
Hi,
I know this idea might sound crazy, but I was wondering about the
prospects
of an IBM mainframe for personal use. I'm aware of the hurdles
considering
the Service Element (hard drives being detroyed, etc.) HMC, OSes, and
other
programs
b) accepting the behaviour of the IBM C compilers and examining
all our sources, changing all partial structure initializations to
memset and, again,
recompiling all our C programs
Kind regards
Bernd
David Crayford schrieb:
Are you sure there isn't an MVC after the MVI?
I rely
Are you sure there isn't an MVC after the MVI?
I rely on that kind of initialization all the time and have never had a
problem. A quick test program shows the correct behavior.
If this is not working as the ANSI standard I suggest you open a PMR. To
circumvent the problem compile with
Marian Gasparovic wrote:
But I see TCO studies that show how System z is competitive and how
customers can save money running on z instead of distributed.
I would like to see those TCO studies. Truth is there are a lot of
companies (big ones included) that are moving
off mainframes to
Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 18:32:24 +0800, David Crayford wrote:
I would like to see those TCO studies. Truth is there are a lot of
companies (big ones included) that are moving
off mainframes to reduce the TCO. Those distributed systems come in
very big iron configurations
john gilmore wrote:
For n = 50(10)100 I inverted an identity matrix, a unit upper triangular
matrix, and a unit lower triangular matrix using first HFP and then BFP.
The results, stated as index numbers with BFP=100, are summarized below.
50 60 70 80 90 100n
101 101 100
Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
In 4b8389b7.9030...@gmail.com, on 02/23/2010
at 03:54 PM, David Crayford dcrayf...@gmail.com said:
You're fundamentally not reentrant if you use any kind of global data.
Nonsense. You're reentrant as long as you ensure that concurrent access
doesn't
Don Poitras wrote:
In article 4b8389b7.9030...@gmail.com you wrote:
Charles Mills wrote:
The fundamental problem I guess is that any solution that keeps a pointer
around somewhere in the code is fundamentally not reentrant, unless I can
figure out how to utilize pseudo-registers. I've heard
Charles Mills wrote:
__malloc24 were intended to be used by LP64 callers
Does that make any sense? Only a 64 bit user would want below the 16 MB line
storage?
And did they ever consider documenting this?
They did. The C/C++ runtime library reference clearly states LP64. It's
Charles Mills wrote:
The fundamental problem I guess is that any solution that keeps a pointer
around somewhere in the code is fundamentally not reentrant, unless I can
figure out how to utilize pseudo-registers. I've heard the term
pseudo-register for years but I have never delved into them.
I would write the routines with init/term (Constructors/Destructors)
functions that allocate and free resources. Have the
init return a handle that you pass to the process/term functions,
usually just an address of a control block. Think of stdio
fopen(), fclose(), fread() etc socket functions
of assembler.
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of David Crayford
Sent: Sunday, February 21, 2010 7:54 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Best practice for 24-bit storage in assembler called from C/C++
I would
Timothy Sipples wrote:
John McKown writes:
Maybe it means that IBM wishes every ISPF (development)
shop to use WDz. Which is more profitable to IBM. cynicism/
Uh, no.
Your mileage may vary, but Rational Developer for System z tends to be more
parsimonious in its use of mainframe CPU
IMO, writing an exit in LE C/C++ just isn't worth the hassle. To write a
proper glue code stub you will need to call your C program via the LE
CEEPIPI service. Trying to get the CAA from the TCB is a shot in the
dark as each ISPF screen runs in a subtask, and IIRC using the SELECT
CMD(...)
Tom Quarendon wrote:
IMO, writing an exit in LE C/C++ just isn't worth the hassle. To write a
proper glue code stub you will need to call your C program via the LE
CEEPIPI service. Trying to get the CAA from the TCB is a shot in the
dark as each ISPF screen runs in a subtask, and IIRC using the
program objects.
Steve
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of David Crayford
Sent: 25 December 2009 00:48
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Assembler program calling a 'C' program with mixed case
long names
You can't use
You can't use the pre-linker with GOFF.
If I were you I would ditch the pre-linker. It's functionally stabalized
and the binder does everything you need and more. Only use the
pre-linker if you want to use load modules in a PDS.
Steve Austin wrote:
Thanks for all your responses. I am now
Timothy Sipples wrote:
It's probably also worth pointing out that, if you crack open the textbook
definition of SOA (Service-Oriented Architecture), you won't find step 1:
throw everything away anywhere. That would tend to be the antithesis of
the definition, as a matter of fact.
While it's
!
Merry Christmas :^)
:)
2009/12/23 john gilmore john_w_gilm...@msn.com:
David Crayford writes:
| The application is written in HLASM which is an esoteric
| language with a shortage of skills.
I doubt that the HLASM itself lacks the skills needed to write any application,
whatever exactly
Why not just use the LOCATE macro to return the fully qualified data set
name. That might be a handy little addition to your JZOS library. It's
also useful for checking if a data set exists.
Kirk Wolf wrote:
I need a programming api to rename datasets, including relative
references to GDGs.
Dave Salt wrote:
A new command called FEX (Find EXpression) is being introduced in the next version of SimpList. It uses the same syntax as the regular ISPF find command, but enhances it with a couple of the concepts used in regular expressions.
That's nice. It's a shame regular ISPF doesn't
Fermat Ma wrote:
Thanks for replying. Actually, the goal is to migrate an application off to
open platform. And the data updated on open platform also needs to be synch
back to IMS. Therefore, we were thinking about using JDBC Type 4 driver.
With that, there should be no need to develop
Timothy Sipples wrote:
David Crayford writes:
Ahhhaaa, you named and shamed and I didn't have to
*search the archives*!
A lot of the Websphere portfolio doesn't port well to z/OS.
I have anecdotal evidence (I was told by an IBMer) that
Websphere messaage broker runs like a stallion on AIX
Ahhhaaa, you named and shamed and I didn't have to *search the archives*!
A lot of the Websphere portfolio doesn't port well to z/OS. I have
anecdotal evidence (I was told by an IBMer) that Websphere messaage
broker runs like a stallion on AIX but sucks big time on z/OS.
Having said that, I
Barbara Nitz wrote:
My shutting down the fork service brought WBIFN to a halt, and probably
rightly so. On the other hand, a 'real' MVS component would have had
recovery in place with provisions for that service happening and terminating all
on its own. Just think of the lengths IMS goes to
Shane wrote:
OMVS on initial launch was an unmitigated disaster. Plenty of us
(customers) tried it, way before IBM even thought of the New Workload
sales pitch.
It was a crock - pure and simple.
Show me piece of IBM mainframe software that wasn't a crock when it
first started. Remember the
McKown, John wrote:
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2009 4:04 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Why are z/OS people reluctant to use z/OS UNIX?
Considering the number of times
Barbara Nitz wrote:
I am one of those who hate UNIX on z/OS. Here's why:
2. A pain with regard to system controls.
a) USS is expected to be exempt from all controls MVS has - look at iefusi and
the huge warnings surrounding it if you *DON'T* give a USS address space
what it wants! Same
Kirk Wolf wrote:
Or this :-)
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=data+masking
That's cute. Can't wait to use it in anger!
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 6:24 PM, P S zosw...@gmail.com wrote:
Ah, if only there was some sort of way to search a global database for
such things. Hey, wait:
Bill Klein wrote:
(to IBM-MAIN and CICS lists),
I have asked this off-list but so far can't find an answer. Can anyone
tell me if Metal C is supported with (works under) CICS or not?
I can imagine that it would be pretty unusual to want this, but as HLASM
(both LE-enabled and not) works with
Kirk Wolf wrote:
Pretty funny - if you find an IBM research journal article in Google
and try to click on the pdf, then you get the please send your $$$
page. BUT - if you click in Google's View as HTML link, then you
can see the HTML version of the article. Google builds an HTML
version as
Mohammad Khan wrote:
And may I ask how many customers actually asked for 64 bit C/C++ or Java ?
Mohammad
Vendors... Of course, 64 bit C/C++ was a high priority because a lot of
middleware is written in those languages, WAS, MQ etc. And 64 bit Java
is a no brainer considering the memory
-7cae-cabb639f6d7b
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
David Crayford
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 6:31 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: question about Oracle on the mainframe
John McKown wrote:
Are you aware
1 - 100 of 109 matches
Mail list logo
