a preprocessed source code. However, run-time results are
unsupported - because it will try and make the CALLs to FD DLL rather
than standard calls.
Bill Klein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
John,
I can't find anything at that page that restricts the use of DLL's
, otherwise I would try it and
report back.
Darren
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Bill Klein
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 1:01 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: COBOL Compiler options
Turns out
I think (but am not certain) that what you want is the information at:
http://www-1.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?rs=431context=SSTLTFdc=DB520dc=D
B560uid=swg21265671loc=en_UScs=UTF-8lang=enrss=ct431other
In particular, specify
//ABNLIGNR DD DUMMY
you may also want to look at:
in Ontario, CA, will be greatly appreciated.
--
Bill Klein
wmklein at ix.netcom.com
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN
I could be mistaken on this, but I don't think there is any requirement for
a C/C++ connector for a non-OO COBOL program to INVOKE (not CALL) an OO
COBOL program.
I eally do NOT know this part of Enterprise COBOL, but you can check out:
If you find cases where the manual says something will work (or you read it
as saying that) and the product doesn't support it, then I would say that is
DEFINITELY a place where you should create a support PMR.
If you have questions about how to (and the manuals aren't clear), and it
is for
If it turns out that there is something that Debug Tool can't do - that you
think it should, I just wanted to let all of you know that the LNGC project
at SHARE is now accepting (processing) requirements against that product.
If you are a SHARE member and would like to enhance Debug Tool (for
For any application (Assembler or otherwise) that needs to take separate
logic paths depending upon whether it is or is not running under CICS (or
some other issues), please do look at the CEE3INF callable service. See:
What was the E-level message (at compile-time)?
Given the other reply to the note, if it was a COBOL program with an error
related to SEGMENTATION - that would certainly seem relevant. If so,
which compiler are you using?
Francois Guillez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL
Current versions (even relatively recent versions) allow for a COBOL debug
file to be a side file. There is even SOME support for debugging programs
compiled with OPT. HOWEVER if you want to use debug tool as a source code
debugger, then you will want to compile with NOOPT, which is certainly
David,
This note makes it appear that what you are looking for is a C++
application debugger. I haven't read all of the notes in the thread, but
making this clear in the subject may help getting more responsive replies.
Therefore, I have added C++ to the subject.
David Logan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Hi
Unforunatly after several years of tests and a number of PMR's etc.
etc we think the IBM C++ debugger is unusable for a
complex applications
We still use a number of printfs to debug C++
Bill Klein wrote:
David,
This note makes
There have been many good replies to this note in IBM-MAIN and I would
certainly agree with those that suggest checking for 97 as well as 00 as
a good file status value. In fact, you may want to check for 97 or ANY
value starting with 0. (Certainly, you need to check for other 0x values
in other
I don't know the answer. I think you *might* get a better reply if you post
this to
comp.lang.cobol
usenet newsgroup. (We have a few COBOL/400 people there)
cowboy007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Hello all,
this is one more newbie to AS400. I have been
If you think that using any of the LE callable services might be useful (now
or in the future) for the program, that would be another reason.
McKown, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Is there any reason that anybody can think of for making an ASSEMBLER
program
Having read the thread (so far), I have a few comments. (All of this is
written assuming that what you want is semi-real-time updates to electronic
versions of IBM documentation).
1) Even in the days of hard-copy TNL's, each TNL was reflected in a new
dash-level. Do you REALLY want a new
This note was posted directly to the USENET newsgroup and hasn't had many
replies. I am forwarding it to the list-server, to see if more people have
input on it. (It is also in the comp.lang.cobol newsgroup).
Graham Hobbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Hello,
Big
The exact requirements for ALL31(OFF) are at:
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/ceea3180/1.2.4.2
Imbriale, Donald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
om...
The information I provided was from the current LE manuals. And I have
confirmed this
I was hoping that no one was going to be able to find any copies of that
paper still online. I am sorry that you were still able to find it at the
site.
I spent quite a bit of time last year trying to work with Hursley and
getting that paper corrected (as well as updated). There are some
all previous parts of the thread snipped
Earlier in this thread there was a discussion about whether or not one was
safe ALWAYS using ALL31(ON) or not.
I think part of the confusion has to do with the subject of this thread
mentioning CICS. If you are talking about a CICS environment (and the
I came in - in the middle of this discussion. Are you talking about the
stuff at:
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/dgt2d540/APPENDIX
1.3.2
I was amused that it doesn't' mention WHICH ANSI or ISO Standard they are
defined in - but I always thought that the A in
From other notes, it looks like the SCLM problem may NOT be a real problem,
HOWEVER,
I did want to remind any/all SHARE members who either have RDz or are
evaluating it, that the LNGC project of SHARE is now accepting (and
processing) SHARE requirements against RDz.
Please, if you are a
I agree that this is probably a compiler error. Or at least disagrees with
the documentation.
According to:
http://publibfp.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr/BOOKS/IGY3LR40/6.1.6.14
and
http://publibfp.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr/BOOKS/IGY3LR40/6.1.6.14.1
and
I don't know if this will help or not, but can you tell us:
A) is the (dynamically called subprogram in) Assembler is LE-conforming or
not?
B) Do you have any other COBOL (older) run-times in the steplib or the
joblib of the program?
C) Does anything in the C03 output tell you which dataset was
When you say
1 VS COBOL program
Do you mean VS COBOL II or OS/VS COBOL? If it is OS/VS COBOL, then this may
WELL be part of the problem.
However, for either VS COBOL II or OS/VS COBOL, was the program compiled
with RES or NORES? (You can use COBANAL or Edge Portfolio to find this
out). If
Howard,
I don't know what release you want, but I tend to keep bunches of them.
Most recent - Enterprise COBOL V4R1
http://publibfp.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr/Shelves/igy3sh40
Last Version 3 URL
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/Shelves/IGY3SH33
These are
previous notes snipped
With all the posts, I don't know if anyone has actually posted the
references for the full discussion on this topic in existing Migration
Guides.
If you previously used the OS/VS COBOL run-time library, please read:
You don't say what programming language (much less what release/version of a
compiler) you are using.
If you are talking about COBOL, it is entirely possible to put as much or as
little as you might want - from either the Data Division *OR* the Procedure
Division.
If fact, if it is distinct set
John,
I don't have a solution for you (Other than, of course, how easy this
would be to do in COBOL G If you need a SORT and a report, COBOL
internal SORT with Report Writer would do this for you easily), but ...
Are you certain you don't have any
John Smith, Jr
or
Mary Brown, III
There have been lots of replies referencing the LE callable date routines.
Depending upon what type of date you are looking for, these may well be your
best answer.
HOWEVER,
If all you want to do is know what the offset is from GMT of where your
application is running, then you can easily just
If you are pre-1.9 then look on line for posts that reference
ILBOWAT0
It does, require AMODE(24) but you can call an interface module to switch
from a main AMODE(31) program to it.
Farley, Peter x23353 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED].
..
NB: This function (and
A couple of MINOR comments
1) The latest version/release of Enterprise COBOL is V4R1. Personally, I
can't think of any reason to go to V3R4 or lower.
2) Someone else has already pointed to the Migration Guide. I would
certainly review it for information on upgrading from an earlier version to
previous info snipped
One thing that MIGHT be causing problems/issues for some sites, is the fact
that Enterprise COBOL V4 does not have a full function version - as
Enterprise COBOL V3 did.
With V3, the full function version included Debug Tool (as did the PL/I
product)
With V4 of Enterprise
Use of the
RECORD VARYING SIZE
in the FD phrase is valid for ALL organizations of files and does return the
record length during a READ.
??? ?? ??? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]..
.
Hi
One of our users is writing a program that reads a variable record
Hopefully, you mean
RECORD VARYING IN SIZE from 0 to 32767 depending on var-name
I do NOT think you can use RECORD CONTAINS with the DEPENDING onphrase.
John McKown joa...@swbell.net wrote in message
news:listserv%20081217160815.1...@bama.ua.edu...
I've always used:
RECORD CONTAINS 0
I am not positive of this, but I think you DO need the JCL override. If the
hard coded maximum LRECL in the FD does NOT match the maximum for the
physical file and you don't have the JCL override, I believe you will get a
file status of 39 when you OPEN the file indicating a physical file
This was supposed to go to the IBM-MAIN, not assembler list. Sorry about
that.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:assembler-l...@listserv.uga.edu]
On Behalf Of Bill Klein
Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:33 AM
To: assembler-l...@listserv.uga.edu
Subject
According to:
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/eqa9ug00/5.1.4
It looks like you are doing this correctly. Assuming you are current on
maintenance, I would report this to the IBM support center (and reference
the documentation above).
Michael Bradley mjm...@yahoo.com
Do you know how the original file was created?
I would be interested if it was created by a COBOL program compiled with
NOAWO.
If so, you may want to make AWO an shop default (and/or non-modifiable
COBOL compiler option)
??? ?? ??? gad...@malam.com wrote in message
I haven't seen the actual problem code - but if it follows (normal) COBOL
rules, there would be a difference between:
LIST
ALL
(on two lines with no hyphen)
versus
LI
-ST all
(on two lines with a hyphen in column 7 of the continuation line).
One uses the hyphen to continue
The last that I heard (which was quite a while ago) if you tried using that
product on z/OS, it could work with line sequential (HFS) files but *NOT*
with normal QSAM files (and I am not even certain about VSAM KSDS or RRDS
files).
Kirk Wolf k...@dovetail.com wrote in message
Clark,
Easy answer, there have been no recent changes to IBM's responses on
floating point (or bit) support.
Harder answer is that you keep getting confused about different terms and
requirements.
In the '02 Standard there are 3 new USAGEs
FLOAT-SHORT
FLOAT-LONG
FLOAT-EXTENDED
IBM (or
Clark,
When you bring up Java, this confuses me. Currently IBM does all the
required conversion for floating point items shared between COBOL and Java
in a z/OS environment.
Do you have real-world evidence that this does isn't working.
***
As far as SHARE requirements go, Requirement
Denis Gäbler denisgaeb...@netscape.net wrote in message
news:8cb40acc0589804-abc-...@webmail-dx19.sysops.aol.com...
For video on demand databases are too slow.
You would use a streaming server, for which I don't know any available for
System z OS except VM Stairs.
In addition, a streaming
I understand your desire for 64-bit COBOL.
I would suggest that if you WANT 64-bit COBOL, that you have your company
submit a marketing requirement and reference SHARE requirement:
SSLNGC0413607 Support 64 bit and web-oriented development in COBOL
Unless you want a 64-bit COBOL that can't
In comp.lang.cobol when someone first comes into the world of migrating
(converting) COBOL created files, we usually point them to Michael Mattias
EXCELLENT web page at:
http://www.talsystems.com/tsihome_html/downloads/C2IEEE.htm
The bottom-line (as others in the thread have hinted at) is that
OOPS, my idea won't work. It is the CEEROPT module itself that you are
trying to find what options are set.
I do not know of a dis-assembler for a CEEROPT load module.
-Original Message-
From: Bill Klein [mailto:wmkl...@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Monday, January 19, 2009 6:44 PM
Final thought (replying to myself, replying to myself G)
Code a small program that CALLs CEE3DMP, that program's output will show you
the run-time options in effect.
-Original Message-
From: Bill Klein [mailto:wmkl...@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Monday, January 19, 2009 6:53 PM
To: IBM
I don't know if this is what you are looking for, but at LE 1.9, you can
A) create a CEEROPT stand-alone module with
RPTOPTS(ON)
(You may or may not want to modify MSGFILE as well)
See:
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/ceea2180/1.9.2
B) place the resuliting load
(New but follow-on thread),
There are now and have been ever since the question was first raised at
least three different issues (IMHO).
1) The one that Clark and others have TRIED to communicate to IBM, but which
seems hard to convey - or at least difficult to hear that IBM understands is
the
Given the recent discussions in IBM-MAIN and given the fact that the 2004
LNGC requirement asked for multiple things (including 64-bit COBOL), I have
created a new SHARE LNGC requirement:
SSLNGC09001 AMODE(64) COBOL that works with AMODE(31) COBOL
If you are a current LNGC project
FYI,
The NOTE statement actually was impacted by the LANGLVL compiler option.
Therefore, if you are converting OS/VS COBOL (or DOS/VS COBOL) code to a
currently supported compiler, you probably want to look this up - to make
certain that you comment the correct lines.
John P Kalinich
Although the '02 ANSI/ISO Standard does allow for user-defined functions,
these are NOT supported by current releases of IBM's Enterprise COBOL.
(Some vendors of Windows and Unix COBOL compilers do already support it).
On the other hand,
What do you mean by a function?
If you want to
Farley, Peter x23353 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
-Original Message-
snip
Tables are another reason to use INITIALIZE, I don't believe VALUE on
table
elements works.
snip
One can use a VALUE clause on an element of a table (and have since the '85
and reference modification, compile with NOSSRANGE (but
document
this)
In general, these rules apply to both batch and online applications.
However,
having the ned for NOSSRANGE for online may occur more often than for
batch
(depending upon system design).
--
Bill Klein
wmklein at ix.netcom.com
Lots of issues with all of this and as you don't tell us whether the CALLs
are static or dynamic, it is hard to tell which of the problems you might be
running into. Some things to think about:
1) Having an OS/VS COBOL program call an LE-COBOL program is the PRIME time
for discovering that some
It returns the local date/time - but what that means depends on how your
system is set up.
Perryman, Brian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
i.com...
Hi folks
Is ACCEPT-DATE supposed to return GMT time, or local time?
We have some issues with a program which was
Unless you have modified IBM's run-time library, the COBOL
ACCEPT from DATE
and
ACCEPT from CONSOLE
are mutually exclusive (and always have been). DATE is a reserved word in
COBOL so you can't have
ACCEPT DATE FROM CONSOLE
You *could* have an
ACCEPT WS-DATE from Console
If you are a SHARE member and are not currently registered to participate in
the LNGC requirement process, I would like to suggest that the following
requirement MIGHT be of sufficient interest to you - so that you (or someone
in your installation) will register and participate in LNGC processing.
I have seen a couple of replies and using REXX or SAS would certainly be a
possibility. (I know one shop that used SPITBOL for this type of thing)
The only tricky things about doing it in COBOL are:
1) with LRECL 133, I assume that the file is REALLY FBA - or FBM - not FB.
If so, then make
FYI (and for the record)
The answer of using the FD-name to qualify has already been supplied in
comp.lang.cobol.
dividby0 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Hi,
I'm writing a COBOL program which accepts 5 KSDS files and extract
data into a single file. All the
John (and IBM-MAIN)
I didn't jump in to this thread as I never quite figured out exactly
what you wanted. (Your trap the name didn't tell me how or where you
wanted to do this).
FYI,
The traditional way for a COBOL application program to let a common
subroutine know where it is being called
, then you should check for a corresponding
announcement letter in your area.
--
Bill Klein
wmklein at ix.netcom.com
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message
If the CALL actually seems to be working and EZASOKET doesn't document such
a CC, then it sounds to me as if this is the old not clearing register 15
problem documented at:
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/igy3pg32/4.2.4.1
where it says,
You might need to think
Just so this is clear, IBM has never (does not now and never will)
guarantee that an ABEND will occur in a COBOL program when bad data is in
a numeric field (of any usage) and any operation is performed.
The COBOL Standard dictates that such situations are UNPREDICTABLE which
means that it may
Easy answer,
NO there is no way to handle bad data as input - without either
changing the COBOL code or introducing some sort of validation' routine
between the sending web application and the COBOL program.
FYI,
Adding an IF NUMERIC test in the COBOL program (at one place - where the
data
in such a feature can/should submit a REQUEST via
their IBM
marketting support referencing this SHARE requirement.
--
Bill Klein
wmklein at ix.netcom.com
Howard Brazee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Nov 3, 2007, at 8:05 PM, Clark Morris wrote:
On 30 Oct 2007 09:18
I assume (but could be mistaken) that you are trying to replace a part of a
string rather than a COBOL text word. Besides the fact that there are
work-arounds for doing partial word replacement, you might be interested
that the current ('02) standard DOES allow for replacing a leading or
trailing
-
From: Bill Klein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 10:25 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Fw: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING...
I assume (but could be mistaken) that you are trying to replace a part
of
a string rather than a COBOL text word. Besides
Anyone that does not want Tom to shoot them G and does want to follow
IBM's PUBLIC statements on both zAAP, zIIP, XML, etc support with COBOL may
want to follow the SHARE requirements:
SSLNGC07004 zAAP and zIIP eligible XML support in COBOL
currently waiting for an IBM response.
If
, Peter x23353 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
-Original Message-
From: Bill Klein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 11:15 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: COBOL COPY statement w REPLACING...
The documented (and functional
FYI,
There are ways that one can sort-of get around this (well-documented)
restriction by using the REPLACE statement rather than the REPLACING phrase
of the COPY statement, but these can complicated and error-prone.
Phillips, Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have NOT tried this myself, but if you are looking for a utility to do
what you want, try running a job with the following step:
//LISTOPT EXEC PGM=EDCALIAS,PARM='ROPTOPTS(ON)/'
From what I have heard you may (or may not) get other stuff and possibly
some ODD messages, but you should (from
Discussions are already ongoing as to whether we need to/should submit a
LNGC project SHARE requirement on either Decimal Floating point or zAPP/zIIP
eligible XML support for COBOL.
I'll keep this list informed when/if such requirements are ready for
discussion
P.S. My *personal* hope is that
If (when) you are using LE V1.8, you can use the LE callable service
CEEENV
See:
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/ceea3170/2.2.5.31
The advantage of using CEEENV over putenv (not PUTENV) is that the
restrictions listed at:
(I sent this to the Assembler list, but meant to ask IBM-MAIN - Sorry if
some see it twice)
A question came up in the COBOL newsgroup about records (not blocks, i.e.
LBI) 32K. I know that QSAM doesn't support this. The current Enterprise
COBOL LRM at:
John P Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
I find that it is better to always refer to the main publications site.
That way, I don't miss anything.
John P Baker
Software Engineer
HFD Technologies
-Original Message-
snip
Ahhh. You're right. I went
See long ongoing thread with same subject in comp.lang.cobol
morde1ac [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Hi All.
My company is currently running IBM Enterprise COBOL for z/OS V3.4.
We are also running SAP. I would like to create a web service in
SAP,
then call
) the information at:
http://publibfp.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr/BOOKS/IGY3MG32/5.4
NOTE WELL:
Changes/Maintenance to *EITHER* LE or COBOL may result in your
needing to
know about this.
--
Bill Klein
wmklein at ix.netcom.com
There have been previous requests for COBOL to have the same type of DD that
PL/I has had for years (and that LE has recently introduced) to avoid this.
However, there certainly is none right now.
Steve has given a couple of answers, and using a CBL (Process) card (that
you can concatenate with
environment variable?
At compile-time?
(LE *does* let you use a DD for setting run-time options - if you are on
z/OS 1.8)
Don Poitras [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Bill Klein wrote:
If the parm string sets environment variables, you can move those
To the best of my knowledge, no current or (relatively recently past, i.e.
OS/VS COBOL or later) compiler has created object code that truncates
passed parameters to called subprograms.
It *IS* true that the compiler itself may (as documented) only pay attention
to the first 100 bytes of passed
Jan MOEYERSONS [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
I actually look after the change management software and am trying to
snip
As an ex-change management person, I have to recommend you do not do that
and indeed that you prohibit your programmers from using the CBL
Check out the what's new section of the Programming Guides. There
actually have been several changes (improvements) along the way.
HOWEVER, even with the latest compiler TRUNC(BIN) should be you option of
LAST resort. Remember that you can use COMP-5 with TRUNC(OPT) to insure
that specific
Like USS the letters LE are now not supposed to be used in official IBM
documents. I know that the dox people have accepted RCF's on it whenever
I still find it (where Language Environment is supposed to be used.
Like USS, once can find LE in macros and other software (and probably
Red Books)
Depends on what run-time is available. If LE (Language Environment) is
available at run-time (probably via the linklist - but possibly in a
steplib), then you can run either VS COBOL II or Enterprise COBOL compiled
programs.
If you only the VS COBOL II run-time available, then NO you cannot
Tony Harminc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
McKown, John wrote:
snip
I'm not sure if this is a good thing, but it will presumably eliminate the
point of things like the COBOL compiler to JVM bytecodes that at least a
couple of vendors provide(d), other than as
There have been lots of answers, but as you have explicitly said that you
are NOT on z/OS 1.8, let me give you a summary of my understanding:
1) PL/I has plixopt (as I recall and COBOL has a share requirement, but
currently there is NO way to set LE run-time options at the time of a COBOL
) ANSI/ISO COBOL process. However, as this *IS* an
ongoing
process, I still believe that getting real world user input is a good
thing -
whether it actually has any impact is simply another matter G.
--
Bill Klein
wmklein at ix.netcom.com
Besides program directories and installation stuff, have you looked at both
the COBOL and the LE Migration Guides/
In general,
I would recommend upgrading the operating system (with LE) first and get
it stable in all environments (LPARs, whatever). After that is stable
(and all your old COBOL
CEE5DLY functionality to LE for z/OS and for z/VM
(even if that requirement was showing RECOGNIZED and not ACCEPTED)
--
Bill Klein
wmklein at ix.netcom.com
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send
Have you contacted IBM support? This certainly sounds like the way to go.
Jim McAlpine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
We have successfully run the sample from the COBOL manual and are now
trying
our own COBOL to Java application but are getting an abend as follows
There were bunches of problems with the COBOL2 translator option
interacting with the DBCS compiler option. I can't (quickly) find a summary
of what APARs fixed which problems. You might want to check out
PKPK26401
and
PK26933:
If you are a SHARE member, you may want to check out
If this feature is important to your site, then you should contact your
marketing branch and ask that a REQUEST be submitted - referencing
existing SHARE requirement:
SSLNGC0313587 - LE Callable Service to get (various) Program Names
(current IBM response RECOGNIZED)
Oscar Flores [EMAIL
Basically, I agree with Steve (Yes, is the default with IS INITIAL and
CANCEL being the major exceptions).
However, I do NOT think that RENT will have any impact; nor will whether or
not it is under CICS. If the subprogram is called dynamically, then
Working-Storage (not Local-Storage) should be
and/or Debug Tool for better mixed COBOL and Java support
Jim McAlpine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
On 2/21/07, Bill Klein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Have you contacted IBM support? This certainly sounds like the way to
go
to: IBM-MAIN and Assembler List-Servers
I just thought that I would post this to IBM-MAIN and ASSEMBLER-LIST
indicating that there are currently 4 LNGC requirements out for voting
(that will close next week). If you are already on the LNGC requirements
distribution list, then you have heard
I don't know what IBM would do with a PRPQ type request for a NEW order
for the OS/VS COBOL compiler, but I don't think it would receive a warm
welcome. (Do you remember how to install a product with SMP4? OS/VS COBOL
was never delivered with SMP/E support)
As far as a shop getting a new
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Of Bill Klein
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 2:45 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: General question on licensing obsolete IBM products
I don't know what IBM would do with a PRPQ type request for a NEW
they work, and no budget for
conversion,
and typical corporate tolerance for risk (i.e., near zero) it is a HUGE
obstacle, and there is no reasoning it away, I fear.
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Of Bill Klein
Sent: Wednesday
1 - 100 of 330 matches
Mail list logo
