It means that only a JS task with no subtasks can issue a ATTACH
JSTCB=YES.
A JS task can have JS subtasks and still issue ATTACH JSTCB=YES.
It just cannot have non-JS daughters and do so.
Peter Relson
z/OS Core Technology Design
In p0624080acb7b553bd18b@[192.168.1.11], on 03/06/2012
at 12:51 AM, Robert A. Rosenberg hal9...@panix.com said:
Are you sure?
Well, I trust Peter. My logic manuals are far too old to cast light on
the current release.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position;
Sample scenario:
-- Initiator attaches jobstep program task
-- jobstep program task attaches non-jobstep task T
-- non-jobstep task T attaches T2 specifying JSTCB=YES
Return Code = x'14'.
A jobstep task may only be attached by a jobstep task. And the subtasks of
a given task may not be a
In 00cc01ccfa4e$3293ec90$97bbc5b0$@net, on 03/04/2012
at 04:31 PM, Micheal Butz michealb...@optonline.net said:
Does this mean that only the initiator can issue a ATTACH JSTCB=YES
No. It means that only a JS task with no subtasks can issue a ATTACH
JSTCB=YES.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J
At 21:10 -0500 on 03/05/2012, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote about
Re: Return code = X'14' from ATTACH JSTCB=YES:
In 00cc01ccfa4e$3293ec90$97bbc5b0$@net, on 03/04/2012
at 04:31 PM, Micheal Butz michealb...@optonline.net said:
Does this mean that only the initiator can issue a ATTACH JSTCB
Hi,
I got a return code of X'15' from ATTACH JSTCB=YES
14
Meaning: Program error. An authorized task that
specified JSTCB=YES is not a job step task
On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 16:31:44 -0500 Micheal Butz michealb...@optonline.net
wrote:
:Hi,
:
:
:
:I got a return code of X'15' from ATTACH JSTCB=YES
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:14
Sorry was running under TESTAUTH SO EXEC PGM=IKJEF
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of Binyamin Dissen
Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2012 4:56 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Return code = X'14' from ATTACH JSTCB=YES
On Sun
ATTACH JSTCB=YES
Sorry was running under TESTAUTH SO EXEC PGM=IKJEF
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of Binyamin Dissen
Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2012 4:56 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Return code = X'14' from ATTACH
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 17:21:12 -0500, Micheal Butz michealb...@optonline.net
wrote:
Hi
Again if I do a attach with disp=no
And r1 has the tcb address I can look at the TCBRBP or relating CDE for the
loadpoint of the module
I'm not quite sure what you mean, but if you only did ATTACH with DISP
Hi
Again if I do a attach with disp=no
And r1 has the tcb address I can look at the TCBRBP or relating CDE for the
loadpoint of the module
Sent from my iPhone
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions
On 2/17/2012 5:21 PM, Micheal Butz wrote:
Again if I do a attach with disp=no And r1 has the tcb
address I can look at the TCBRBP or relating CDE for the
loadpoint of the module
I'm not really sure what you're looking for. The CDE (or LPDE
for an LPA module) points to another CDE (if it's
Gerhard has outlined what is available very well, but you seem to be
confusing load addresses with entry points and to be assuming that
there is/will be only one entry.
One, but only one, of the important uses of aliases is to associate
different aliases with different entries in the same load
Hi,
If I do 4 attaches to the same program then there will be only one copy of
the program
But each TCB will have its own set of RB's indicating where each task is to
resume processing
--
For IBM-MAIN
, ATTACH terminates before the module is loaded. The LOAD is done by
the new task.
--
Binyamin Dissen bdis...@dissensoftware.com
http://www.dissensoftware.com
Director, Dissen Software, Bar Grill - Israel
Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me,
you should preauthorize
by modeset
Just wondering if I got it right
thanks
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of Binyamin Dissen
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2012 3:21 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Control Blocks Generated By Attach
On Sun, 1 Jan
In 000601ccc8c5$61fbb4a0$25f31de0$@net, on 01/01/2012
at 03:38 PM, Micheal Butz michealb...@optonline.net said:
Only one CDE
Yes, if it's linked as RENT and the name is not an alias then there
will be 4 PRB's all pointing to the same CDE and the use count in the
CDE will be 4.
Also
On 1 January 2012 15:38, Micheal Butz michealb...@optonline.net wrote:
The TCB is just a control block that keeps track of ownership of resources
storage, modules loaded, in the case of DB2 which DB2 SSID is associated
with task
Well perhaps, but that's a strange way of putting it. The TCB
but I do not think that is
correct since the calling program saves the registers and R14 points
to LINK(x) or ATTACH(x) when the calling program is called.
No.
As to the reference to LINK/Attach manuals it simply states that the
registers are changed (I had already looked there). It didn't say
This has all been interesting but I don't think my question has been
answered (sorry if I missed it). Some said I could get the real return
address in the save area trace but I do not think that is correct since
the calling program saves the registers and R14 points to LINK(x) or
ATTACH(x
the registers and R14 points to LINK(x) or
ATTACH(x) when the calling program is called.
The calling program does not save the registers.
When the processing of an RB is suspended, the PSW is stored in RBOPSW.
LINK and ATTACH both cause an SVC interruption and the RB is suspended.
Link creates
Donald,
You seem to be asking about what happens to the real R14, is that
correct? How do you define real, If you are asking where the contents
of R14 at the point the LINK(X) or ATTACH(X) macro is issued in the
calling program are stored, the answer is simple, they aren't. Both
On July 4, Peter Relson corrected my misstatement that the application
program invoked from EXEC PGM= is invoked by a LINK. Charlie Chan
would have said foot in mouth come from rust in brain. I should
have realized that it is invoked by ATTACH, since it runs under its
own TCB, rather than
system. LINK behaves on the surface very much as
ATTACH does, except that execution of the program issuing the LINK
stops, and does not resume until the LINKed to program returns to the
operating system.
Some said I could get the real return
address in the save area trace but I do not think
In listserv%201107011418256324.0...@bama.ua.edu, on 07/01/2011
at 02:18 PM, Donald Likens dlik...@infosecinc.com said:
I have a situation where my subtask terminates and it seems it
returns to somewhere in my program and starts executing my primary
task (hard to believe isn't it).
In fact, I
In
b282be35b5a4494894d4ecfba2bf7847180f25b...@xch-nw-17v.nw.nos.boeing.com,
on 07/01/2011
at 12:38 PM, Schwarz, Barry A barry.a.schw...@boeing.com said:
If an attached task has terminated, there should be nothing in your
dump related to it.
Depending on the options, the TCB will persist until
In listserv%201107011545301271.0...@bama.ua.edu, on 07/01/2011
at 03:45 PM, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com said:
What do LINK and ATTACH respectively pass the child program as a save
area pointer?
As documented, LINK leaves R2-R13 alone. ATTACH creates a save area
for the new task
In listserv%201107011533075067.0...@bama.ua.edu, on 07/01/2011
at 03:33 PM, Tom Marchant m42tom-ibmm...@yahoo.com said:
LINK is an SVC and the linked program runs under control of an SVRB.
No; SVC 6 creates a PRB for the linked program, and exits before the
PRB receives control.
The SVC will
to).
You're both wrong. While link creates a PRB, so does ATTACH, and the
Initiator uses ATTACH for the jobstep program, not LINK. At least,
that is how it worked from OS/360 R14 on.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume
In 1309697614.9025.31.ca...@dv7t.johnmckown.net, on 07/03/2011
at 07:53 AM, John McKown joa...@swbell.net said:
As I recall, you have a program running on a PRB. It issues a LINK
which runs on a SVRB (as do all type 3 and 4 SVCs). The LINK runs the
requested program on a PRB. If you abend in
In 1309724814.9025.41.ca...@dv7t.johnmckown.net, on 07/03/2011
at 03:26 PM, John McKown joa...@swbell.net said:
This is what I see in my SYSUDUMP. It was not what I was expecting at
all.
PRB#1 runs pgm1 which issues SVC 6 (LINK)
SVRB#1 is for SVC 0x33
SVRB#2 is for SVC 0x78
That says that
On July 1, Tom Marchant wrote:
LINK is an SVC and the linked program runs under control of an SVRB.
Since when? Perhaps everything has turned upside down while I was
retiring, but my memory says that LINK results in the program running
under a PRB. In fact (unless this has been rewritten
As I recall, you have a program running on a PRB. It issues a LINK which
runs on a SVRB (as do all type 3 and 4 SVCs). The LINK runs the
requested program on a PRB. If you abend in the second, the dump will
show the TCB (TCBRBP) pointing to the second PRB which points (RBLINKB)
to the SVRB which
On 7/3/2011 8:53 AM, John McKown wrote:
As I recall, you have a program running on a PRB. It issues a LINK which
runs on a SVRB (as do all type 3 and 4 SVCs). The LINK runs the
requested program on a PRB. If you abend in the second, the dump will
show the TCB (TCBRBP) pointing to the second PRB
You are likely correct. I'll try to remember to test this when I get a
chance.
--
John McKown
Maranatha!
Sent from my Vibrant Android phone.
On Jul 3, 2011 10:13 AM, Gerhard Postpischil gerh...@valley.net wrote:
On 7/3/2011 8:53 AM, John McKown wrote:
As I recall, you have a program running
For LINK and ATTACH, the address in register 14 on entry to the target
routine is in common storage and is the address of an SVC 3.
As you expect, if your subtask terminates then it would not resume
anywhere. Therefore one must suspect that it did not terminate, although
it might have intended
This is what I see in my SYSUDUMP. It was not what I was expecting at
all.
PRB#1 runs pgm1 which issues SVC 6 (LINK)
SVRB#1 is for SVC 0x33
SVRB#2 is for SVC 0x78
And that is all. No PRB or CDE for the second pgm at all. Which makes no
sense because I added it using an IDENTIFY macro. I'm
On Fri, 1 Jul 2011 14:18:25 -0500 Donald Likens dlik...@infosecinc.com
wrote:
:I have a situation where my subtask terminates and it seems it returns
:to somewhere in my program and starts executing my primary task
:(hard to believe isn't it). I want to check out my theory by determining
:in a
I have a situation where my subtask terminates and it seems it returns
to somewhere in my program and starts executing my primary task
(hard to believe isn't it). I want to check out my theory by determining
in a dump where the attachx is going to return to after I execute the BR
14 (and
both
compete for execution time independently. The code following the ATTACH(X)
macro can execute before or after any portion of the attached task. If you
need the mother task to wait on the daughter, it is your responsibility to WAIT
on the ECB.
If a linked routine follows normal save area
in your dump should be the ECB.
The exit from an ATTACH is SVC 3. BR 14 takes you to CVTEXIT. If the
task was attached with the ECB= or EXTR= operands, it is not removed
from virtual storage until a DETACH is issued. I've never looked at a
dump at that point in time, but I think that means
the LINK was issued.
What do LINK and ATTACH respectively pass the child program
as a save area pointer?
o The caller's R13?
o Other (specify)?
If the caller ATTACHes multiple subtasks, must it provide
a separate save area for each?
-- gil
On Fri, 1 Jul 2011 15:45:30 -0500, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
What do LINK and ATTACH respectively pass the child program
as a save area pointer?
I'm not sure about LINK.
Attach always provides a 144-byte save area regardless of what was in
the attaching program's r13.
If the caller ATTACHes
On 7/1/2011 1:45 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
What do LINK and ATTACH respectively pass the child program
as a save area pointer?
o The caller's R13?
o Other (specify)?
The answer for LINK is fully documented.
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/iea2a9b0/69.1.4
(Hint
On Fri, 1 Jul 2011 16:18:33 -0500, Tom Marchant m42tom-
ibmm...@yahoo.com wrote:
. . .
Attach always provides a 144-byte save area . . .
Not always. Not when SVAREA=NO specified and condition of supervisor
state or system key met
At 22:05 -0800 on 12/05/2010, Sam Siegel wrote about Re: Attach RC=20:
I believe that he is talking about the way may of the newer IBM macros (when
generated in List form) will create an equate (similar to the one you show
below) with an L appended to provide the length of the macro expansion
On 12/6/2010 5:58 PM, Robert A. Rosenberg wrote:
OK. That I can see - I was questioning how a L' label could work. If it
was L* then I can see it.
It's actually *L.
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
310-338-0400
On Sat, 4 Dec 2010 17:23:03 -0800 Sam Siegel s...@pscsi.net wrote:
:Hi List,
:
:I'm getting a return code of 20 in RC when issuing an attach macro. RC=20
:does not seem to be documented. Can anyone provide an explanation or
:assistance? Details listed here
X'14' = 20.
Quite possibly due
wsAttach dsxl(l'csAttch)
As Bill Godfrey correctly indicated, the value of L'csAttch is not the
length of the parameter area. It happens to be 4.
Therefore the MVC only moved 4 bytes and the defined storage area for
wsAttach was only 4 bytes.
And, if what was posted was truly a copy of
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 5:37 PM, Bill Godfrey yak36...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Sat, 4 Dec 2010 17:23:03 -0800, Sam Siegel wrote:
I'm getting a return code of 20 in RC when issuing an attach macro. RC=20
does not seem to be documented. Can anyone provide an explanation or
assistance? Details
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 3:02 AM, Binyamin Dissen
bdis...@dissensoftware.comwrote:
On Sat, 4 Dec 2010 17:23:03 -0800 Sam Siegel s...@pscsi.net wrote:
:Hi List,
:
:I'm getting a return code of 20 in RC when issuing an attach macro.
RC=20
:does not seem to be documented. Can anyone provide
right after the list form and then use that equate.
Yes it is the code directly from the source.
* read only macro models
csAttch Attach Eploc=,+
Etxr=, +
Sm=SUPV
At 15:03 -0800 on 12/05/2010, Edward Jaffe wrote about Re: Attach RC=20:
On 12/5/2010 6:27 AM, Peter Relson wrote:
Rather than use L'csAttch, a typical approach is to add an equate such as
csAttch_Len EQU *-csAttch
right after the list form and then use that equate.
I like how (many of? most
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 6:55 PM, Robert A. Rosenberg hal9...@panix.comwrote:
At 15:03 -0800 on 12/05/2010, Edward Jaffe wrote about Re: Attach RC=20:
On 12/5/2010 6:27 AM, Peter Relson wrote:
Rather than use L'csAttch, a typical approach is to add an equate such as
csAttch_Len EQU
Hi List,
I'm getting a return code of 20 in RC when issuing an attach macro. RC=20
does not seem to be documented. Can anyone provide an explanation or
assistance? Details listed here
APF authorized library
AC=1
RENT
Batch job
Modeset Mode=SUP
Key=4
Storage obtained working storage SP=230
On Sat, 4 Dec 2010 17:23:03 -0800, Sam Siegel wrote:
I'm getting a return code of 20 in RC when issuing an attach macro. RC=20
does not seem to be documented. Can anyone provide an explanation or
assistance? Details listed here
* Invocation:
Lar1,wsdtflag
str1
On 11/2/2010 12:17 PM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
You can get in trouble even if you know those nuances, because an
idiom has semantics based on factors beyond vocabulary. Understanding
the individual words perfectly doesn't help.
Case in point - many, many years ago I was asked to take a
In listserv%201010311434090886.0...@bama.ua.edu, on 10/31/2010
at 02:34 PM, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com said:
Would you have preferred the more legible lacunae? (My viewer
corrupted the ligature.)
Probably because it does not support MIME properly. It seems to lose
the charset when
In
dc74548a025aff4a85f46926802a9b230555b...@chsa1035.share.beluni.net,
on 11/02/2010
at 09:31 AM, Hunkeler Peter (KIUP 4)
peter.hunke...@credit-suisse.com said:
You'll surely gonna explain to me what intelligence has to do with
the knowledge of a foreign language? Remember, there many people
In listserv%201011011924424160.0...@bama.ua.edu, on 11/01/2010
at 07:24 PM, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com said:
Google tells me for:
she is naive; he is naive
qu'elle est na ve, il est na f
I seriously doubt that. Perhaps you meant to have ï in there
somewhere, but your
In aanlktik+d89dqf--v2hhv2eej1lpz-ybi1l9a+xji...@mail.gmail.com, on
11/01/2010
at 12:05 PM, Mike Schwab mike.a.sch...@gmail.com said:
I like the US-English-International Keyboard setting on Windows /
Linux.
There's more than one US International mapping. The one that I'm using
doesn't have a
In 5359.87171...@web38903.mail.mud.yahoo.com, on 11/01/2010
at 12:31 PM, Ted MacNEIL eamacn...@yahoo.ca said:
What ever happened to 'look it up'?
That's fine in the classroom;difficult in real life.
Yes, it's much better IRL to release buggy code rather than hitting
the manuals.
If I had
In 38a766e3736a439e8465c2a593dc1...@ownerpc, on 11/01/2010
at 09:25 AM, Tony's FRONTIER account tbabo...@frontier.com
said:
But now I just wish I knew how to squash the a and the e together.
Use MIME, ensure that you have the correct charset in your header and
insert the correct code point
In aanlktik30g48+hed9wlpdkv=guy7l0efzhn41btzr...@mail.gmail.com, on
11/01/2010
at 03:27 PM, Sam Siegel s...@pscsi.net said:
However, many people of Asian decent or whose native language is
not of Romance origin (Hebrew, Arabic, etc.) have none of the
context or background mentioned above by
At 12:17 -0400 on 11/02/2010, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote about Re: ATTACH:
You can get in trouble even if you know those nuances, because an
idiom has semantics based on factors beyond vocabulary. Understanding
the individual words perfectly doesn't help.
There is also the issue
Not to mention the difference in the meaning of Bootie
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
Robert A. Rosenberg
Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2010 8:15 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: ATTACH
At 12:17 -0400 on 11/02
Robert A. Rosenbergwrote:
... English uses Hood and Trunk (for car parts).
Time to put a Hood over this thread and place it in the Trunk.
;-D
I'm not talking about car parts ...
'Hood' - Think of that little girlie, Red Riding Hood who disturbed that little
wolfie while he is trying to p**
-snip
You can get in trouble even if you know those nuances, because an idiom
has semantics based on factors beyond vocabulary. Understanding the
individual words perfectly doesn't help.
On 3 November 2010 17:27, Rick Fochtman rfocht...@ync.net wrote:
I remember from college of a translator program that covered multiple
languages. The phrase Out of sight, out of mind was fed in, in English.
After translation to a number of other languages and finally back to
English, it came
Granted, that does not mean use obscure words that are
not generally in use. But there does need to be some level
of assumption about the intelligence of the members.
You'll surely gonna explain to me what intelligence has to
do with the knowledge of a foreign language? Remember, there
many
The calling of him naive was also insulting.
Not the first time by honorable Mr. Gilmore.
--
Peter Hunkeler
Credit Suisse
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 6:23 PM, Bill Fairchild bi...@mainstar.com wrote:
deleted
BTW, I finally found an online definition of Rob Scott's words cromulent
and embiggins.
This page
http://www.cracked.com/article_15269_from-cromulent-to-craptacular-top-12-simpsons-created-words_p2.html
used to
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 7:09 PM, Robert A. Rosenberg hal9...@panix.com wrote:
deleted
The
latter refers to a style of writing where alternate lines are written from
left to right and right to left (it is a reference to a method of plowing a
field where when you reach the end of a row you turn
-main
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2010 8:31 PM
Subject: Re: ATTACH
My problem in all of this is that I am unfamiliar with the term eduction
as anything but a technical one in geology.
It is not I suppose impossible, on the principles of English word
formation
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 10:25 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: ATTACH
It's part of my enjoyment of John Gilmore that many of his words have sent me
to various web sites for definition. But now I just wish I knew how to squash
the a and the e together.
:-)
- Original
@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: ATTACH
It's part of my enjoyment of John Gilmore that many of his words have sent
me to
various web sites for definition. But now I just wish I knew how to squash
the a and the e together.
:-)
- Original Message -
From: john gilmore john_w_gilm
78759
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Tony's FRONTIER account
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 9:25 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: ATTACH
It's part of my enjoyment of John Gilmore that many of his words
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: ATTACH
It's part of my enjoyment of John Gilmore that many of his words have sent
me to
various web sites for definition. But now I just wish I knew how to squash
the a and the e together.
:-)
- Original Message -
From: john gilmore
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 12:32 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: ATTACH
I be diggin' my man John's words too. He don't be lunchin'. He be keepin' it
real.
Word.
Bill Fairchild
Rocket Software
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m
I like the US-English-International Keyboard setting on Windows / Linux.
Once you set this setting, when you type the first combineable
character, it is not echoed to the screen until the next character is
typed. If the combination is one character, the combined character
will be sent, otherwise
On 31 October 2010 12:59, john gilmore john_w_gilm...@msn.com wrote:
One of the chief uses of a subtask is to delegate to it a function that is in
some sense perilous, may fail/ABEND. Such a subtask ABEND leaves the parent
task alive in circumstances that
would have killed it if it had
There's a lot to be said for vocabulary enhancement.
Yes, but there is a lot to be said for communicating.
I'm tired of hearing that everything must be written for a 5th grade level
audience.
There's a reason for that. Most people are lucky if they can read at that high
of a level.
What ever
snip--
There's a lot to be said for vocabulary enhancement. I'm tired of
hearing that everything must be written for a 5th grade level audience.
What ever happened to 'look it up'?
: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 2:32 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: ATTACH
There's a lot to be said for vocabulary enhancement.
Yes, but there is a lot to be said for communicating.
I'm tired
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 2:32 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: ATTACH
There's a lot to be said for vocabulary enhancement.
Yes, but there is a lot
] On
Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 2:32 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: ATTACH
There's a lot to be said for vocabulary enhancement.
Yes, but there is a lot to be said for communicating.
I'm tired of hearing that everything must be written for a 5th grade level
Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
Ted MacNEIL
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 2:32 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: ATTACH
There's a lot to be said for vocabulary enhancement.
Yes, but there is a lot to be said for communicating.
I'm tired of hearing
I do in fact give some thought to the needs of participants who are not native
speakers of English, and with some of them I sometimes have clarifying offline
exchanges in one of the other languages that I know well.
Vocabulary, as measured by one of the standard intelligence scales, has
ætat, having only five letters, cannot possibly be characterized as big,
and its meaning is instantly obvious given a knowledge of Latin roots, as was
lacunae, also not a big word.
Speaking of precision, I said large/obscure, not big.
Nor did he describe the OP as naïve.
He said that the OP
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 3:00 PM, john gilmore john_w_gilm...@msn.com wrote:
snip
In second languages, however, things are very different. There is an
important sense in which the notionally difficult words are the same in
every language. A Russian may, for example, have a small English
, 2010 5:04 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: ATTACH
ætat, having only five letters, cannot possibly be characterized as big,
and its meaning is instantly obvious given a knowledge of Latin roots, as was
lacunae, also not a big word.
Speaking of precision, I said large/obscure, not big
...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
Ted MacNEIL
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 2:32 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: ATTACH
There's a lot to be said for vocabulary enhancement.
Yes, but there is a lot to be said for communicating.
I'm tired of hearing that everything must be written
You chose to assume Mr. Gilmore meant naïve as an insult; I chose to assume he
meant inexperienced.
Speaking of precision.
Novice is inexperience.
Naive is lack of understanding.
If one goes looking for insults, one can usually find them.
Naive is insulting; I didn't have to hunt for it.
List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
Steve Comstock
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 5:56 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: ATTACH
On 11/1/2010 2:35 PM, Bill Fairchild wrote:
Many repliers have emphasized clarity and precision.
Although Mr. Gilmore's word choice is sometimes
At 20:35 + on 11/01/2010, Bill Fairchild wrote about Re: ATTACH:
be sure that your post is just as clear and precise as you wish his
had been. Were it not for Mr. Gilmore's predilection for precise
meanings, I would still be ignorant of the words antipode and
boustrophedon (the latter
At 12:05 -0500 on 11/01/2010, Mike Schwab wrote about Re: ATTACH:
I like the US-English-International Keyboard setting on Windows / Linux.
Once you set this setting, when you type the first combineable
character, it is not echoed to the screen until the next character is
typed
On Mon, 1 Nov 2010 16:56:12 -0600, Steve Comstock wrote:
Nor did he describe the OP as naïve. He said that the OP was
a naïf.
No. He said: They are radically naif., speaking of the OP's
questions.
These two words are not synonymous. Naïve is an adjective
and naïf is a noun, as he used
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com wrote:
On Mon, 1 Nov 2010 16:56:12 -0600, Steve Comstock wrote:
snip
And no one has until now taken Mr. Gilmore to task for
disingenuously (in my perception) pouncing upon Sam Siegel's
typo. I suppose there must be a
On 11/1/2010 6:31 PM, Sam Siegel wrote:
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Paul Gilmartinpaulgboul...@aim.com wrote:
On Mon, 1 Nov 2010 16:56:12 -0600, Steve Comstock wrote:
snip
And no one has until now taken Mr. Gilmore to task for
disingenuously (in my perception) pouncing upon Sam
I will refrain from pouncing on Steve Comstock for misspelling 'Murphy'. He
may well have done it disingenuously.
I am grateful to those who defended my post, and I will venture a further
comment. Too much attention was devoted to manner as opposed to matter in the
posts that were
1 - 100 of 284 matches
Mail list logo
