You might also try DMAP and/or PMAP, says one of my friends.
Rick
On 1/11/2012 8:05 PM, Stewart, David James wrote:
Try using option OFFSET and make sure NOOFFSET is not specified or
amend NOOFSET to OFFSET :)
LIST and MAP will give you the generated ASSEMBLER (OBJECT) code
David Stewart
On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 17:36:47 -0600, Rick Fochtman wrote:
You might also try DMAP and/or PMAP, says one of my friends.
DMAP/PMAP were available in OS/VS COBOL, not in Enterprise COBOL.
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/IGY3MG50/APPENDIX1.6
Norbert Friemel
@bama.ua.edu
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 6:36 PM
Subject: Re: COBOL Compiler option
You might also try DMAP and/or PMAP, says one of my friends.
Rick
On 1/11/2012 8:05 PM, Stewart, David James wrote:
Try using option OFFSET and make sure NOOFFSET is not specified or
amend NOOFSET to OFFSET
Website for internal use: MF COE support site
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Graham Hobbs
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 12:19 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: COBOL Compiler option
Sam, LIST didn't show
Hello,
When I look at the output listing of a compiled pgm, I used to be able to
see field
displacements of copybooks and working storage. What is the option that
does this ..
nothing in the options list stands out.
Thanks,
Graham Hobbs
Graham,
What version of COBOL. In some releases
, January 09, 2012 11:34 PM
Subject: Re: COBOL Compiler option
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 7:51 PM, Graham Hobbs gho...@cdpwise.net wrote:
Hello,
When I look at the output listing of a compiled pgm, I used to be able to
see field displacements of copybooks and working storage. What is the
option
Hello,
When I look at the output listing of a compiled pgm, I used to be able to see
field displacements of copybooks and working storage. What is the option that
does this .. nothing in the options list stands out.
Thanks,
Graham Hobbs
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 7:51 PM, Graham Hobbs gho...@cdpwise.net wrote:
Hello,
When I look at the output listing of a compiled pgm, I used to be able to
see field displacements of copybooks and working storage. What is the
option that does this .. nothing in the options list stands out.
Hi IBM-Main,
I read somewhere that there have been some major performance
improvements to the use of the TRUNC(BIN) compiler option.
ENTERPRISE COBOL FOR Z/OS 3.3.1
and
ENTERPRISE COBOL FOR Z/OS 3.4.0
Does anyone have any information on this ? ...
The background on this is we are
In a message dated 4/24/2007 7:36:26 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My understanding is TRUNC(BIN) was used by a lot of customers
because they were afraid of data being truncated when working
with, say, DB2 and other apps that use the whole capacity of
a binary
Hello List,
I am modifying up my compile procs with options needed for Fault Analyzer.
In reviewing these options, there is one called NOS, which is not in my
documentation. I have spent half a day slogging through the archives with
no success. I would like to delete options that are not
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
@SAA.SENATE.GOV cc:
Sent by: IBM Subject: NOS COBOL compiler
option
NOS is a valid abbreviation for NOSOURCE. See:
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/IGY3PG30/2.4.46
(You probably should do an RCF against the Fault Analyzer documentation)
Lynne Karson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Hello List,
I am
I believe it is the short form of NOSource
Ken Porowski
AVP Systems Software
CIT Group
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
Lynne Karson
Hello List,
I am modifying up my compile procs with options needed for Fault Analyzer.
In reviewing these options, there is one called NOS,
Lynne Karson wrote:
Hello List,
I am modifying up my compile procs with options needed for Fault Analyzer.
In reviewing these options, there is one called NOS, which is not in my
documentation. I have spent half a day slogging through the archives with
no success. I would like to delete
Thank you all for your rapid responses. The Fault Analyzer options do
include the Source option as mandatory. I will remove the NOS option
from my compile procs. Thank you again.
Lynne Karson
Senior Software Specialist
US Senate Sergeant at Arms
(202)224-9587
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Karson, Lynne (SAA) wrote:
Thank you all for your rapid responses. The Fault Analyzer options do
include the Source option as mandatory. I will remove the NOS option
from my compile procs. Thank you again.
Lynne Karson
Senior Software Specialist
US Senate Sergeant at Arms
(202)224-9587
snip
So obviously NOS was in your procs. Just out of
curiosity, why would you ever specify NOS?
Kind regards,
-Steve Comstock
Interesting question. The procs were originally set up by BearingPoint
when they installed their General Ledger/Accounts Payable application.
Since this still is
Karson, Lynne (SAA) wrote:
snip
So obviously NOS was in your procs. Just out of
curiosity, why would you ever specify NOS?
Kind regards,
-Steve Comstock
Interesting question. The procs were originally set up by BearingPoint
when they installed their General Ledger/Accounts Payable
snip
Thanks for that mention; most people don't notice.
Do you guys need any training these days?
Kind regards,
-Steve Comstock
The Trainer's Friend, Inc.
We are in the process of training for several topics.
DB2
Crystal Reports
BMC monitoring tools
Connect:Direct
SCLM
We have attended SHARE
So obviously NOS was in your procs. Just out of
curiosity, why would you ever specify NOS?
...
Years ago, I saw this touted as a 'possibility' for saving SPOOL space when
DASD was expensive.
I asked how would the programmer debug the code.
After the laughter died, the proposal was withdrawn.
21 matches
Mail list logo
