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 to
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
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 6:27 AM, Peter Relson rel...@us.ibm.com wrote:
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
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
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
st
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
I will refrain from pouncing on Bill Fairchild for the redundancy of from
thence. Doh! ;-)
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 20:35:48 +
From: bi...@mainstar.com
Subject: Re: ATTACH
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Many repliers have emphasized clarity and precision. Although Mr. Gilmore's
word
I read but did not respond to the original post of this thread. The job of
explaining multitasking ab initio seemed more appropriate to a book than a post.
Some lacunæ have, however, appeared as the thread has developed.
One of the chief uses of a subtask is to delegate to it a function that
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 9:59 AM, john gilmore john_w_gilm...@msn.comwrote:
snip
Some lacunæ have, however, appeared as the thread has developed.
Please use common (plainly written) English when posting.
snip
The OP's questions are certainly not bad or inappropriate. They are
radically
On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 10:31:06 -0700, Sam Siegel wrote:
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 9:59 AM, john gilmore wrote:
Some lacunæ have, however, appeared as the thread has developed.
Please use common (plainly written) English when posting.
Would you have preferred the more legible lacunae? (My
viewer
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.comwrote:
On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 10:31:06 -0700, Sam Siegel wrote:
snip
That's just John G. at his finest. Contributors more sophisticated
than the OP have earned the designation radically naif. Think of
it as the capsaicin in
Yes. I've seen those posts. I'm just looking for the delivery to be heavy
on technology eduction and easy on English education. This is IBM-MAIN
after all, not the KINGS-ENGLISH-MAIN! 'http://www.bartleby.com/116/'
Rather a pity actually.
Night all
= On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Paul
: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
J. D. Cassidy
Sent: 31 October 2010 20:08
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: ATTACH
Yes. I've seen those posts. I'm just looking for the delivery to be heavy
on technology eduction and easy on English education
Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of J. D. Cassidy
Sent: 31 October 2010 20:08
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: ATTACH
Yes. I've seen those posts. I'm just looking for the delivery to be heavy
on technology eduction and easy on English education. This is IBM-MAIN
after
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, as
a substantive formed from educe (educere); but I have never seen it; the OED
wots not of it;
63 matches
Mail list logo
