Re: Constant Identifiers

2020-09-05 Thread Jeremy Nicoll
On Sat, 5 Sep 2020, at 21:21, Bob Bridges wrote: > Going back to the beginning, Gil: SQRT(X**TWO+Y**TWO) looks like > ~exactly~ the sort of thing that oughta be made a constant rather than > being coded more than once. That is, if X, Y and TWO all constants > themselves; and if they are not

Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)

2020-09-05 Thread Jeremy Nicoll
On Sat, 5 Sep 2020, at 21:09, Bob Bridges wrote: > I've never done that, but I have done something like it: > > str=word('true false',(0-fx)+2) Why (0-fx)+2when 2-fxis simpler? > (If I have to explain it, it just proves I should never write it that > way in the first place.

Re: Ransoming a mainframe disk farm

2020-09-05 Thread Jonathan Quay
We once had a database so valuable that it was mirrored to a remote site where 8, 16, and 24 hour PIT copies of it were made. We could do forward recovery from tape if needed. This was more to protect against an application trashing the data than anything else. It was hoped that data

Re: Constant Identifiers

2020-09-05 Thread Bob Bridges
When you care about efficiency, I'd think this would be better: const=4/3*3.14159E0 /* in the initialization */ volume=const*radius**3 /* inside the loop */ --- Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313 /* Things may come to those who wait, but only those things left behind by

Re: Constant Identifiers

2020-09-05 Thread Bob Bridges
Going back to the beginning, Gil: SQRT(X**TWO+Y**TWO) looks like ~exactly~ the sort of thing that oughta be made a constant rather than being coded more than once. That is, if X, Y and TWO all constants themselves; and if they are not then this isn't an example of what you're talking about.

Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)

2020-09-05 Thread Paul Gilmartin
On Sat, 5 Sep 2020 23:36:37 +0100, Rupert Reynolds wrote: >Writing Rexx for myself (therefore no local standards to follow) I had to >set an internal boolean in a few places. >So I started it with >TRUE = (1=1) >FALSE = \TRUE > Now you have them; how are they useful? (Examples?) >That's partly

Re: Ransoming a mainframe disk farm

2020-09-05 Thread Russell Witt
John, But what happens if the virtual tape environment itself was over-written? That is where the concept of "virtual WORM" devices can help. A virtual WORM volume cannot be over-written. And if your tape management system itself is protected, the tapes will not be scratched until they should

Re: Architectural Level Sets

2020-09-05 Thread Dymoke-Bradshaw, Lennie
I have a copy of the manual "Amdahl MVS/SP Assist Release 1.0 Software Logic Manual" L1020.0-02A from October 1982. I recall we used this to run MVS/SP 1.3 on old 370/158 machines. It would simulate the entire set of "new" cross-memory services instructions, such as MVCP, MVCS, PC, PT and so

Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)

2020-09-05 Thread Rupert Reynolds
Writing Rexx for myself (therefore no local standards to follow) I had to set an internal boolean in a few places. So I started it with TRUE = (1=1) FALSE = \TRUE That's partly because I couldn't find doc on Rexx standards (no WWW yet) and I didn't like to assume that 1 and 0 were always valid

Re: Ransoming a mainframe disk farm

2020-09-05 Thread Tom Brennan
And to take this one step further (really one step too far), IBM boxes (DS and TS) have a built-in function called Secure Data Overwrite, so that before an old, replaced box goes out the door, the user can get a certification that all their old data is truly overwritten with multiple passes.

Re: Constant Identifiers

2020-09-05 Thread Bob Bridges
Gotta side with Robin on that one. --- Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313 /* Law #37 of combat operations: Anything you do can get you killed, including nothing. */ -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf

REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)

2020-09-05 Thread Bob Bridges
I've never done that, but I have done something like it: str=word('true false',(0-fx)+2) ...where fx is Boolean. I hope I've done it only in programs I wrote for my own use. But I sometimes write a tool for myself, then move it to a public library on request, so that monster may be out

Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)

2020-09-05 Thread Paul Gilmartin
On Sat, 5 Sep 2020 16:09:32 -0400, Bob Bridges wrote: > > str=word('true false',(0-fx)+2) > >...where fx is Boolean. > My use of COPIES() was to save 2 lines of code while knowing that the function call/return overhead is large and IF would perform better. > if fx then str='true'; else

Re: zIIP MultiThreads

2020-09-05 Thread Salva Carrasco
We see 1.3 on peak hours. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Ransoming a mainframe disk farm

2020-09-05 Thread John McKown
If I were to consider this (which I don't because my shop _is_ going away 1Q2021), what I would do is have a "golden image" (aka sysprog sandbox or the GI) in a different LPAR. This image would have access to all attached devices, including sharing a virtual tape environment. But the "core"

Re: zIIP MultiThreads

2020-09-05 Thread Scott Chapman
On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 09:22:09 -0700, Ed Jaffe wrote: >IMHO, if you need additional zIIP capacity for a production workload, it >probably makes more sense to configure another zIIP core online than it >does to enable MT=2. Agreed. SMT is a good thing to keep in your pocket for the emergency of

Re: Pascal(was: Constant Identifiers)

2020-09-05 Thread Robert Prins
On 2020-09-04 18:36, Paul Gilmartin wrote: On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 20:38:29 +, Robert Prins wrote: On 2020-09-04 17:01, Paul Gilmartin wrote: I see everything twice: On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 19:05:32 +, Robert Prins wrote: On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 19:06:49 +, Robert Prins wrote: Yes, problems

Re: Pascal(was: Constant Identifiers)

2020-09-05 Thread Paul Gilmartin
On Sat, 5 Sep 2020 12:06:49 +, Robert Prins wrote: > >... definitely not to keep myself in the picture. >The simple fact is that I hate it that 'doze displays timestamps different in >different time zones. So my TZ is UTC. > The time is different in different timezones. What do you expect?

Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)

2020-09-05 Thread Robin Vowels
On 2020-09-06 11:50, Seymour J Metz wrote: Eschew obfuscation. Either just use 0 and one, or write false=0;true=1. Similarly, for PL/I either just use '0'b and '1'b or write false='0'b;true='1'b;. VALUE is a good alternative also.

Re: Constant Identifiers

2020-09-05 Thread Seymour J Metz
When you're dealing with small integers that stand for themselves, theres neither benfit nor harm for making them named constants. It's "magic numbers" that you need to avoid, e.g., approximations, exchange rates. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3

Re: Constant Identifiers

2020-09-05 Thread Seymour J Metz
Don't most compilers these days do constant folding? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Bob Bridges Sent: Saturday, September 5, 2020 4:18 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject:

Re: Constant Identifiers

2020-09-05 Thread Paul Gilmartin
On Sat, 5 Sep 2020 08:13:42 +1000, Robin Vowels wrote: > >As for writing formulas, I prefer to follow a well-known formula, thus: > >volume = 4/3 * 3.14159 * radius**3 > Beware! Than might left-associate as: volume = ( 4/3 ) * 3.14159 * radius**3 ... and the quotient of integers, 4/3, is 1.

Re: Constant Identifiers

2020-09-05 Thread Seymour J Metz
The issue in contention is the wording of the text, not its location. I never claimed that it was in the right manual. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Robin Vowels Sent:

Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)

2020-09-05 Thread Seymour J Metz
Eschew obfuscation. Either just use 0 and one, or write false=0;true=1. Similarly, for PL/I either just use '0'b and '1'b or write false='0'b;true='1'b;. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on

Re: Constant Identifiers

2020-09-05 Thread Robin Vowels
That's obfuscation. If it's in a loop, I'd expect the compiler to move the constant part outside of the loop, or to evaluate the constant part at compilation time. In any case, the more efficient form eliminates the division 4/3, avoiding the avaluation in fixed-point form (and the conversion