Re: Record description converter

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Mon, 5 Apr 2021 18:32:56 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:

>I have used it extensively. It is way better than nothing but it has some 
>severe limitations.
>
>Also it is only DSECT to C struct. The OP was looking for, and I am interested 
>in, any to any.
> 
*If* you control the assembler source source:
o Describe your data area as a DSECT mapped to C
o Include the DSECT
o Create an equal-sized area in your assembler program
o Access it with a dependent USING.

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IBM snew DOC Web SIte

[kekronbekron]

What would also be useful is a next/previous button at the top right & bottom 
right of each Doc page.
2 places because for pages that are long, one doesn't need to 'go to top'.

- KB

‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Tuesday, April 6, 2021 7:38 AM, kekronbekron 
<02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

> Works ok for me.
> I should say, I do like the generous use of IBM Plex and the look of the site.
> Hope they get rid of the feedback banner at the bottom soon.
> Or at least make it an easy to use set of buttons in the footer (where 
> language selection is).
>
> https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/cics-ts/5.2?topic=commands-cemt-perform-pipeline
>
> -   KB
>
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> On Tuesday, April 6, 2021 1:31 AM, esst...@juno.com esst...@juno.com 
> wrote:
>
>
> > .HelloAnyone experiencing problems with IBMs new doc site ?.For Example:If 
> > I google CICS PIPELINE SCAN , I am presented with many references to 
> > documentation with "pipeline scan"If any of these references invoke the old 
> > Knowledge Center, I am re-directed to a new IBM doc site..However I am 
> > presented with a White Page, with no substance ?.Anyone else getting 
> > this.Paul D'Angelo
> >
> > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
> --
>
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IBM snew DOC Web SIte

[kekronbekron]

Works ok for me.
I should say, I do like the generous use of IBM Plex and the look of the site.
Hope they get rid of the feedback banner at the bottom soon.
Or at least make it an easy to use set of buttons in the footer (where language 
selection is).

https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/cics-ts/5.2?topic=commands-cemt-perform-pipeline

- KB

‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Tuesday, April 6, 2021 1:31 AM, esst...@juno.com  wrote:

> .HelloAnyone experiencing problems with IBMs new doc site ?.For Example:If I 
> google CICS PIPELINE SCAN , I am presented with many references to 
> documentation with "pipeline scan"If any of these references invoke the old 
> Knowledge Center, I am re-directed to a new IBM doc site..However I am 
> presented with a White Page, with no substance ?.Anyone else getting 
> this.Paul D'Angelo
>
> ---
>
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

[Seymour J Metz]

Actually, the lack of a metalanguage is the norm except for assemblers; PL/I is 
an exception in that regard. Ada, Go, Java, Perl, Python, Ruby, Raku (Perl 6), 
Rust, etc., lack metalanguages.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Charles Mills [charl...@mcn.org]
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 11:15 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

The literal answer to your question is COPY. Assembler COPY is completely the 
analog of COBOL COPY.

Assembler COPY is less powerful than COBOL COPY: there is no COPY REPLACING in 
assembler.

OTOH, Assembler has macros, which are like COPY but much, much more powerful.

I am going to go out on a limb -- someone will surely correct me -- and say 
that COBOL is unique or at least atypical among modern "powerful" programming 
languages in that it has no real preprocessor language. There is no "meta" 
programming (to speak of) in COBOL. No real way to "dynamically construct" a 
program at compile time.

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Warren Brown
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 7:22 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

 Hello,
I've been away for a while.  What is the assembly language equivalent for a 
COBOL copybook?
Thanks,
Warren
On Monday, March 29, 2021, 11:08:43 AM EDT, Wendell Lovewell 
<01e9c0ee0673-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

 Hello all.

Does anyone know if Dr Ehrman's excellent assembler book could be updated for 
the new instructions released since 2015?  Or, at least refreshed with current 
standards for PDF-page generation standards?

What I mean is, it would really be helpful if:
a) The pages in the Table of Contents were hyperlinks to the actual pages 
referenced, and
b) The page numbers in the TOC matched the page numbers in the PDF file.  For 
example, "MVCLE" is listed in the TOC on page 411.  But if you alt-g to go to 
the 411th page in the PDF, you end up on the page displaying "373" at the 
bottom.

More recent manuals "document" page numbers match the "pdf" page numbers.  But 
as best I can tell Dr. Ehrman's book hasn't been updated to reflect this.

Is there any chance someone from IBM is reading this & can do something about 
this?  Please?

(I know this might make more sense to post on the Assembler list, but I'm 
guessing it's more likely to be seen here.)

TIA,
Wendell

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Meta languages [was: RE: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers]

[Seymour J Metz]

Keep in mind that the metalanguage for C and C++ is horribly crude; it can't do 
the sorts of things that make macro attractive in other languages.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Charles Mills [charl...@mcn.org]
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 1:23 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Meta languages [was: RE: Assembler Language Programming for IBM 
System z Servers]

> But IMHO none easy to learn or use.

I am generally not a fan of meta languages at all. I think writing programs is 
hard enough, without having to write two effective programs: one that runs at 
compile time and one that runs at run time.

In my C++, which is now my primary language, I eschew the use of C macros as 
much as reasonably possible. Reasonableness is a key here. For a few things, 
macros make sense.

One example. I have a lot of bi-modal code: it runs "production" on z/OS and 
"limited unit test" on Windows. Rather than wrap block after block with #ifdef 
WIN32 or #ifdef __MVS__, I do that once, in a "universal" header file

#ifdef WIN32
static const bool IsZOS = false;
#else
static const bool IsZOS = true;
#endif

Then anywhere in the code I can write

if (IsZOS) {z/OS specific code}
else {Windows specific code}

I think it's a lot easier to read, and there is no runtime performance penalty. 
The z/OS optimizing compiler is smart enough to totally eliminate conditionals 
based on a constant.

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 9:31 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Meta languages [was: RE: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System 
z Servers]

True.  There is m4 in *ix systems and going back a long time there was ML/1 (I 
think there was an academic book published on that one, I think I have a copy 
somewhere around here).  Undoubtedly others I do not know of or remember.

Probably also Wirth's "literate programming" suite, TeX I think it is called.

But IMHO none easy to learn or use.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Record description converter

[Charles Mills]

I have used it extensively. It is way better than nothing but it has some 
severe limitations.

Also it is only DSECT to C struct. The OP was looking for, and I am interested 
in, any to any.

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Peter Van Dyke
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 5:47 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Record description converter

The z/OS XL C/C++ DSECT conversion utility (
https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.3.0?topic=guide-dsect-conversion-utility)
may provide a small piece of what you're looking for.

Peter Van Dyke
HCL Software

On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 at 06:55, Paul Gilmartin <
000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

> On Mon, 5 Apr 2021 17:11:41 -0300, Clark Morris wrote:
>
> >I would like to see a set of two way conversion tools that would
> >convert COBOL copybooks to Assembler DSECTs and vice versa, SORT
> >symbols to and from Assembler DSECTs, PL1 structures to and from
> >Assembler DSECTs etc.  If this were available it would be possible to
> >convert COBOL record descriptions to their PL1 equivalent, Assembler
> >DSECTs, SORT symbols, C Structures, etc.  Data types not supported in
> >a language would have comments (bits in COBOL for example).  This
> >would allow a shop to have a set of common descriptions across
> >languages.  I would have used this when I was working.
> >
> UNCOL revisited: an attempt to reduce a problem of quadratic
> complexity to linear.
>
> -- gil
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Record description converter

[Peter Van Dyke]

The z/OS XL C/C++ DSECT conversion utility (
https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.3.0?topic=guide-dsect-conversion-utility)
may provide a small piece of what you're looking for.

Peter Van Dyke
HCL Software

On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 at 06:55, Paul Gilmartin <
000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

> On Mon, 5 Apr 2021 17:11:41 -0300, Clark Morris wrote:
>
> >I would like to see a set of two way conversion tools that would
> >convert COBOL copybooks to Assembler DSECTs and vice versa, SORT
> >symbols to and from Assembler DSECTs, PL1 structures to and from
> >Assembler DSECTs etc.  If this were available it would be possible to
> >convert COBOL record descriptions to their PL1 equivalent, Assembler
> >DSECTs, SORT symbols, C Structures, etc.  Data types not supported in
> >a language would have comments (bits in COBOL for example).  This
> >would allow a shop to have a set of common descriptions across
> >languages.  I would have used this when I was working.
> >
> UNCOL revisited: an attempt to reduce a problem of quadratic
> complexity to linear.
>
> -- gil
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Accurate listing of IDRDATA to TRANSLATOR ID's

[Peter Van Dyke]

Hi. IBM File Manager has a 'View Load Module' function which can show the
compilers used to create the CSECTs in a load module. Recent enhancements
to 'View Load Module' provide the ability to search load modules for
particular types of CSECTs. For example, you could search a library for the
load modules containing CSECTs compiled with a particular compiler. You can
search on values such as the compiler name, compiler product ID, compiler
options and CSECT names.

Peter Van Dyke
HCL Software

On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 at 22:00, Farley, Peter x23353 <
031df298a9da-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

> CBT file 321 (COBANALZ by Roland Schiradin) does a pretty darn good job of
> identifying the compiler that generated a module, and the price is right.
>
> Just use the SUMMARY DD output if all you need is the main program
> compiler version.  If you have statically linked COBOL (or other language)
> user subroutines, you will have to browse the SYSPRINT detail output to see
> the compiler information for them.
>
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf
> Of Kenneth J. Kripke
> Sent: Thursday, April 1, 2021 8:34 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Accurate listing of IDRDATA to TRANSLATOR ID's
>
> EXTERNAL EMAIL
>
> Does IBM maintain a list of Translator ID's that corollate to the language
> processor/compiler product that produced CSECTS?  Purpose is to identify
>
> What version of a compiler produced the CSECT.  The goal is to identify
> COBOL VS modules when reviewing an AMBLIST LISTIDR output.
>
>
>
> Sincerely Yours;
>
>
>
> k.kri...@comcast.net 
> --
>
> This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the
> addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential.
> If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized
> representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
> dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by
> e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your system.
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Record description converter

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Mon, 5 Apr 2021 17:11:41 -0300, Clark Morris wrote:

>I would like to see a set of two way conversion tools that would
>convert COBOL copybooks to Assembler DSECTs and vice versa, SORT
>symbols to and from Assembler DSECTs, PL1 structures to and from
>Assembler DSECTs etc.  If this were available it would be possible to
>convert COBOL record descriptions to their PL1 equivalent, Assembler
>DSECTs, SORT symbols, C Structures, etc.  Data types not supported in
>a language would have comments (bits in COBOL for example).  This
>would allow a shop to have a set of common descriptions across
>languages.  I would have used this when I was working.  
>
UNCOL revisited: an attempt to reduce a problem of quadratic
complexity to linear.

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Meta languages [was: RE: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers]

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Mon, 5 Apr 2021 10:23:58 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:
>
>#ifdef WIN32
>static const bool IsZOS = false;
>#else
>static const bool IsZOS = true;
>#endif
>
Hmmm ... Anything that isn't WIN32 is z/OS.
∴ Linux == z/OS;

(Granted, I'm unfamiliar with your environment.)

But I once on a FOSS project made a similar mistake; something like:

#define EBCDIC ( '0' == 240 )

... only to be scolded by a programmer on an EBCDIC system on which
'0'  != 240; Siemens BS2000.

My Pascal training dies hard; I still prefer "enum" to "static const".
And only "#define" is available for preprocessor tests.

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Machine-readable flag for "development-only z/OS'

[Mark Jacobs]

Re: zOS.e, yes there was.

CVTOSLV5 DCXL1'7F'   BYTE 5 OF CVTOSLVL
CVTZOSE  EQU   X'80' z/OS.e
CVTZOSAS EQU   X'80' z/OS.e
CVTPUMA  EQU   X'80' z/OS.e

Mark Jacobs

Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email.

GPG Public Key - 
https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get=markjac...@protonmail.com

‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐

On Monday, April 5th, 2021 at 5:37 PM, Charles Mills  wrote:

> 1.  I have my reasons that I do not wish to go into in public. They are valid 
> reasons, and no, the reason does not involve bypassing any restriction.
> 2.  I do not want to use the CPU machine type for the exact reasons you 
> describe. I know IBM has done this with other models from time to time. I am 
> looking for a software flag.
>
> Remember z/OS.e? Was there an in-memory flag for that?
>
> Right: what is "production"? If you are a software development shop, 
> aren't compiles your "production"? I used to try (with limited success) to 
> make that argument with IBM support to justify a Sev 1: all my developers are 
> dead in the water -- development is my "production."
>
> Charles
>
> -Original Message-
>
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
> Behalf Of Dave Jousma
>
> Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 11:36 AM
>
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>
> Subject: Re: Machine-readable flag for "development-only z/OS'
>
> So, this question got me thinking.
>
> We have a few ZD instances running here. I was not fully involved with 
> the group bringing it in, other than setting some ground rules regarding 
> customization, and "who" would be supporting.
>
> My recollection though, is that the Terms & Conditions of ZD state "no 
> production workload". However, to my knowledge there is no mechanical 
> enforcement of that? I mean what constitutes production workloads?
>
> I'm only asking a theoretical question, in that since IBM doesn't enforce 
> via mechanical means, why bother at your end Charles to try to code something 
> for that? You know darn well the machine type will change one day, and if you 
> code off of that, it will break your code? What if someone is testing your 
> code validly in zD, but not using it for production?
>
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Google V Oracle

[Bill Johnson]

Right after the decision, Google announced they are replacing Oracle financial 
software with SAP. I remember when Oracle bigots claimed it was going to own 
the IT world and replace DB2. About the same time “experts” said the mainframe 
would be dead by 2000. 


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Monday, April 5, 2021, 4:40 PM, Robert Prins  
wrote:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/18-956_d18f.pdf
-- 
Robert AH Prins
robert.ah.prins(a)gmail.com
The hitchhiking grandfather - https://prino.neocities.org/
Some REXX code for use on z/OS - https://prino.neocities.org/zOS/zOS-Tools.html

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN




--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Machine-readable flag for "development-only z/OS'

[Charles Mills]

1. I have my reasons that I do not wish to go into in public. They are valid 
reasons, and no, the reason does not involve bypassing any restriction.

2. I do not want to use the CPU machine type for the exact reasons you 
describe. I know IBM has done this with other models from time to time. I am 
looking for a software flag. 

Remember z/OS.e? Was there an in-memory flag for that?

Right: what is "production"? If you are a software development shop, aren't 
compiles your "production"? I used to try (with limited success) to make that 
argument with IBM support to justify a Sev 1: all my developers are dead in the 
water  -- development is my "production."

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Dave Jousma
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 11:36 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Machine-readable flag for "development-only z/OS'

So, this question got me thinking.

We have a few ZD instances running here.   I was not fully involved with the 
group bringing it in, other than setting some ground rules regarding 
customization, and "who" would be supporting.   

My recollection though, is that the Terms & Conditions of ZD state "no 
production workload".However, to my knowledge there is no mechanical 
enforcement of that?   I mean what constitutes production workloads?

I'm only asking a theoretical question, in that since IBM doesn't enforce via 
mechanical means, why bother at your end Charles to try to code something for 
that?   You know darn well the machine type will change one day, and if you 
code off of that, it will break your code?   What if someone is testing your 
code validly in zD, but not using it for production?

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Record description converter

[Charles Mills]

I have given a lot of thought to such a product.

I have experience with converting Assembler ADATA into a proprietary record
layout schema.

If anyone has ideas on how to pursue this please contact me off-line. E-mail
address should be above.

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Clark Morris
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 1:12 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Record description converter

I would like to see a set of two way conversion tools that would
convert COBOL copybooks to Assembler DSECTs and vice versa, SORT
symbols to and from Assembler DSECTs, PL1 structures to and from
Assembler DSECTs etc.  If this were available it would be possible to
convert COBOL record descriptions to their PL1 equivalent, Assembler
DSECTs, SORT symbols, C Structures, etc.  Data types not supported in
a language would have comments (bits in COBOL for example).  This
would allow a shop to have a set of common descriptions across
languages.  I would have used this when I was working.  

Clark Morris

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IBM snew DOC Web SIte

[Farley, Peter x23353]

When I used Chrome from my employer's Win10 laptop all the google hits for 
"CICS PIPELINE SCAN" included this prefix in the google hit url:

https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/. . . 

and all of them transferred immediately to an IBM docs url and an actual 
informational page there, like this 5th google hit:

Google hit:

https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSGMCP_5.3.0/com.ibm.cics.ts.exampleapplication.doc/topics/dfhxa_t424.html

Page after clicking on the hit:

https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/cics-ts/5.3?topic=application-deploying-web-services-binding-file

Your issue is not happening here.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
esst...@juno.com
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 4:01 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: IBM snew DOC Web SIte

EXTERNAL EMAIL

.HelloAnyone experiencing problems with IBMs new doc site ?.For Example:If I 
google CICS PIPELINE SCAN , I am presented with many references to 
documentation with "pipeline scan"If any of these references invoke the old 
Knowledge Center, I am re-directed to a new IBM doc site..However I am 
presented with a White Page, with no substance ?.Anyone else getting this.Paul 
D'Angelo   

--

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee 
and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader 
of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any 
attachments from your system.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Google V Oracle

[Robert Prins]

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/18-956_d18f.pdf
--
Robert AH Prins
robert.ah.prins(a)gmail.com
The hitchhiking grandfather - https://prino.neocities.org/
Some REXX code for use on z/OS - https://prino.neocities.org/zOS/zOS-Tools.html

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Fwd: Group Ownership [of PL1-L]

[Robert Prins]

This was posted to the PL/I list today, I thought it might be useful to
also post it here,just in case anyone here feels like volunteering.

Robert
-- Forwarded message -
From: Dick Duggan 
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2021 at 16:48
Subject: Group Ownership
To: 


Hi all,

I've been the sole owner of this group for ... can't remember, but many
years.

3 things:

1) Like everybody, I won't be around forever.

2) No group should really have just one owner because losing that owner for
any reason can mean bad things for the group if something goes wrong.
(Granted that with the low volume here not much goes wrong.  It's been a
long time since I've had to intervene.)

3) I haven't used PL/1 in several decades and at this stage of my life it's
extremely unlikely that I'll ever get back to it.

So ... in case you haven't guessed, I'm looking for at least one, but
preferable 2, new owners.  There's very little involved in doing the
"job".  Just need to have somebody designated if needed.

Thanks,

  -  Dick



-- 
Robert AH Prins
robert(a)prino(d)org
The hitchhiking grandfather 
Some REXX code for use on z/OS


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Record description converter

[Clark Morris]

I would like to see a set of two way conversion tools that would
convert COBOL copybooks to Assembler DSECTs and vice versa, SORT
symbols to and from Assembler DSECTs, PL1 structures to and from
Assembler DSECTs etc.  If this were available it would be possible to
convert COBOL record descriptions to their PL1 equivalent, Assembler
DSECTs, SORT symbols, C Structures, etc.  Data types not supported in
a language would have comments (bits in COBOL for example).  This
would allow a shop to have a set of common descriptions across
languages.  I would have used this when I was working.  

Clark Morris

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

IBM snew DOC Web SIte

[esst...@juno.com]

.HelloAnyone experiencing problems with IBMs new doc site ?.For Example:If I 
google CICS PIPELINE SCAN , I am presented with many references to 
documentation with "pipeline scan"If any of these references invoke the old 
Knowledge Center, I am re-directed to a new IBM doc site..However I am 
presented with a White Page, with no substance ?.Anyone else getting this.Paul 
D'Angelo

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Meta languages [was: RE: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers]

[Tony Thigpen]

I think they have a letter from the estate for their use, but even that 
letter has got to be really old. Last time I mentioned XBOL, someone 
mentioned they were still running it on z/OS. (My client is z/VSE.)


It's really a crappy language. All the variables are a combination of a 
letter and a sequential number. But, it generates both batch and CICS 
code without having to know much about CICS.


Tony Thigpen

Farley, Peter x23353 wrote on 4/5/21 2:00 PM:

Interesting.  I would presume your client received the source due to an escrow 
clause in the original contract.  Any chance the original XBOL developer's 
estate would allow the product to be open-sourced for community development?  
Or is it abandonware at this point?

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Tony Thigpen
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 1:03 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Meta languages [was: RE: Assembler Language Programming for IBM 
System z Servers]

I am helping support a customer that has XBOL which generates COBOL. The 
original developer has passed away, but my client has the source. We have had 
to make changes for 'gone' COBOL verbs and such.

I don't think CA's MetaCobol is currently marketed. I talked to them several 
years ago about it.

I personally wrote and use a COBOL "pre-compiler" that handles a few things for 
me:
1) It let's you specify Working Storage, Linkage Section and Procedural Section 
in any COBOL copybook. It re-orders the generated code so that the parts are 
plugged into the output source in the right order. This makes it easy to put 
things like date routines within the program when such routines require working 
storage fields to do their calculations.
2) It calls 'calls' the CICS pre-processor before generating the final code. 
z/VSE does not have such an option currently.

I do have some more I want to do with it, but have not had the time. I would like it to 
be more "macro like" for such things as BMS screens.

Tony Thigpen

--

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee 
and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader 
of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any 
attachments from your system.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Machine-readable flag for "development-only z/OS'

[Dave Jousma]

So, this question got me thinking.

We have a few ZD instances running here.   I was not fully involved with the 
group bringing it in, other than setting some ground rules regarding 
customization, and "who" would be supporting.   

My recollection though, is that the Terms & Conditions of ZD state "no 
production workload".However, to my knowledge there is no mechanical 
enforcement of that?   I mean what constitutes production workloads?

I'm only asking a theoretical question, in that since IBM doesn't enforce via 
mechanical means, why bother at your end Charles to try to code something for 
that?   You know darn well the machine type will change one day, and if you 
code off of that, it will break your code?   What if someone is testing your 
code validly in zD, but not using it for production?

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Machine-readable flag for "development-only z/OS'

[Mark Jacobs]

I just happened to be on our zPDT system, and here's a partial output of the D 
M=CPU command.

CPC ND =  z1090.Axx.IBM.02.usapfzpdt01p
CPC SI = 1090.306.IBM.02.
 Model: L03

Something there might be usable for checking.

Mark Jacobs


Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email.

GPG Public Key - 
https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get=markjac...@protonmail.com

‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐

On Monday, April 5th, 2021 at 1:38 PM, Charles Mills  wrote:

> I know IBM sells z/OS licenses that are for development only, such as the Z
>
> Development and Test Environment.
>
> Is there a machine-readable flag that indicates that a z/OS instance is
>
> development only? Would it be possible to write an app that, just as an
>
> example, refused to run in such an environment?
>
> Charles
>
> ---
>
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Machine-readable flag for "development-only z/OS'

[Steve Austin]

IBM and vendors' will have model 1090 and customers' 1091, zPDT and zD
respectively.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of PINION, RICHARD W.
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 6:45 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Machine-readable flag for "development-only z/OS'

zPDT shows a CPU model number of 1090.  Perhaps you could use that?

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf
Of Charles Mills
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 1:38 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Machine-readable flag for "development-only z/OS'

[External Email. Exercise caution when clicking links or opening
attachments.]

I know IBM sells z/OS licenses that are for development only, such as the
Z Development and Test Environment.

Is there a machine-readable flag that indicates that a z/OS instance is
development only? Would it be possible to write an app that, just as an
example, refused to run in such an environment?

Charles

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email
to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Confidentiality notice:
This e-mail message, including any attachments, may contain legally
privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended
recipient(s), or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of this
message to the intended recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, distribution, or copying of this e-mail message is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately
notify the sender and delete this e-mail message from your computer.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email
to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

-- 
This e-mail message has been scanned and cleared by Google Message Security 
and the UNICOM Global security systems. This message is for the named 
person's use only. If you receive this message in error, please delete it 
and notify the sender. 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Meta languages [was: RE: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers]

[Farley, Peter x23353]

Interesting.  I would presume your client received the source due to an escrow 
clause in the original contract.  Any chance the original XBOL developer's 
estate would allow the product to be open-sourced for community development?  
Or is it abandonware at this point?

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Tony Thigpen
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 1:03 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Meta languages [was: RE: Assembler Language Programming for IBM 
System z Servers]

I am helping support a customer that has XBOL which generates COBOL. The 
original developer has passed away, but my client has the source. We have had 
to make changes for 'gone' COBOL verbs and such.

I don't think CA's MetaCobol is currently marketed. I talked to them several 
years ago about it.

I personally wrote and use a COBOL "pre-compiler" that handles a few things for 
me:
1) It let's you specify Working Storage, Linkage Section and Procedural Section 
in any COBOL copybook. It re-orders the generated code so that the parts are 
plugged into the output source in the right order. This makes it easy to put 
things like date routines within the program when such routines require working 
storage fields to do their calculations.
2) It calls 'calls' the CICS pre-processor before generating the final code. 
z/VSE does not have such an option currently.

I do have some more I want to do with it, but have not had the time. I would 
like it to be more "macro like" for such things as BMS screens.

Tony Thigpen

--

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee 
and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader 
of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any 
attachments from your system.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Machine-readable flag for "development-only z/OS'

[PINION, RICHARD W.]

zPDT shows a CPU model number of 1090.  Perhaps you could use that?

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Charles Mills
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 1:38 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Machine-readable flag for "development-only z/OS'

[External Email. Exercise caution when clicking links or opening attachments.]

I know IBM sells z/OS licenses that are for development only, such as the Z 
Development and Test Environment.

Is there a machine-readable flag that indicates that a z/OS instance is 
development only? Would it be possible to write an app that, just as an 
example, refused to run in such an environment?

Charles

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Confidentiality notice: 
This e-mail message, including any attachments, may contain legally privileged 
and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient(s), or 
the employee or agent responsible for delivery of this message to the intended 
recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or 
copying of this e-mail message is strictly prohibited. If you have received 
this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete this 
e-mail message from your computer.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Machine-readable flag for "development-only z/OS'

[Charles Mills]

I know IBM sells z/OS licenses that are for development only, such as the Z
Development and Test Environment.

Is there a machine-readable flag that indicates that a z/OS instance is
development only? Would it be possible to write an app that, just as an
example, refused to run in such an environment? 

Charles 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Meta languages [was: RE: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers]

[Charles Mills]

> But IMHO none easy to learn or use.

I am generally not a fan of meta languages at all. I think writing programs is 
hard enough, without having to write two effective programs: one that runs at 
compile time and one that runs at run time.

In my C++, which is now my primary language, I eschew the use of C macros as 
much as reasonably possible. Reasonableness is a key here. For a few things, 
macros make sense.

One example. I have a lot of bi-modal code: it runs "production" on z/OS and 
"limited unit test" on Windows. Rather than wrap block after block with #ifdef 
WIN32 or #ifdef __MVS__, I do that once, in a "universal" header file

#ifdef WIN32
static const bool IsZOS = false;
#else
static const bool IsZOS = true;
#endif

Then anywhere in the code I can write

if (IsZOS) {z/OS specific code}
else {Windows specific code}

I think it's a lot easier to read, and there is no runtime performance penalty. 
The z/OS optimizing compiler is smart enough to totally eliminate conditionals 
based on a constant.

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 9:31 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Meta languages [was: RE: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System 
z Servers]

True.  There is m4 in *ix systems and going back a long time there was ML/1 (I 
think there was an academic book published on that one, I think I have a copy 
somewhere around here).  Undoubtedly others I do not know of or remember.

Probably also Wirth's "literate programming" suite, TeX I think it is called.

But IMHO none easy to learn or use.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

[Seymour J Metz]

There are lots of text processing languages, some general purpose and some, 
e.g., XSLT, intended for specific types of text files.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Charles Mills [charl...@mcn.org]
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 12:20 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

Aren't there "generic" meta languages: meta languages that may be used to 
generate any sort of text, including source code for most any language?

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 8:47 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

True for the language itself, but at least one ISV addressed that lack -- the 
MetaCOBOL product.  I have forgotten who the original vendor ISV was - maybe 
ADR? -- but I think it now resides somewhere in the CA / Broadcom universe.

IMHO PL/1 (and no doubt the PL/X internal IBM language from the little we see 
of it in SYS1.MACLIB) has the most powerful language-defined preprocessor.  One 
could wish for a similar language-defined capability for COBOL, not that it 
will ever happen.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Charles Mills
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 11:15 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

EXTERNAL EMAIL

The literal answer to your question is COPY. Assembler COPY is completely the 
analog of COBOL COPY.

Assembler COPY is less powerful than COBOL COPY: there is no COPY REPLACING in 
assembler.

OTOH, Assembler has macros, which are like COPY but much, much more powerful.

I am going to go out on a limb -- someone will surely correct me -- and say 
that COBOL is unique or at least atypical among modern "powerful" programming 
languages in that it has no real preprocessor language. There is no "meta" 
programming (to speak of) in COBOL. No real way to "dynamically construct" a 
program at compile time.

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Warren Brown
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 7:22 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

 Hello,
I've been away for a while.  What is the assembly language equivalent for a 
COBOL copybook?
Thanks,
Warren
On Monday, March 29, 2021, 11:08:43 AM EDT, Wendell Lovewell 
<01e9c0ee0673-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

 Hello all.

Does anyone know if Dr Ehrman's excellent assembler book could be updated for 
the new instructions released since 2015?  Or, at least refreshed with current 
standards for PDF-page generation standards?

What I mean is, it would really be helpful if:
a) The pages in the Table of Contents were hyperlinks to the actual pages 
referenced, and
b) The page numbers in the TOC matched the page numbers in the PDF file.  For 
example, "MVCLE" is listed in the TOC on page 411.  But if you alt-g to go to 
the 411th page in the PDF, you end up on the page displaying "373" at the 
bottom.

More recent manuals "document" page numbers match the "pdf" page numbers.  But 
as best I can tell Dr. Ehrman's book hasn't been updated to reflect this.

Is there any chance someone from IBM is reading this & can do something about 
this?  Please?

(I know this might make more sense to post on the Assembler list, but I'm 
guessing it's more likely to be seen here.)

TIA,
Wendell

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee 
and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader 
of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any 
attachments from your system.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive 

Re: Meta languages [was: RE: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers]

[Farley, Peter x23353]

Oops.  Yes, Knuth not Wirth.

Agreed that meta-language that is close to the base language is the easiest to 
learn and use.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 1:03 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Meta languages [was: RE: Assembler Language Programming for IBM 
System z Servers]

On Mon, 5 Apr 2021 16:30:53 +, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:

>True.  There is m4 in *ix systems and going back a long time there was ML/1 (I 
>think there was an academic book published on that one, I think I have a copy 
>somewhere around here).  Undoubtedly others I do not know of or remember.
>
>Probably also Wirth's "literate programming" suite, TeX I think it is called.
> 
Knuth?

>But IMHO none easy to learn or use.
>
PL/I addresses ease of use by making the metalanguage similar to the base 
language.

My favorite experience was with Mainsail which integrated its metalanguage with 
its compiler: not "IF DEFINED()" but "IF DECLARED()".  And the metalanguage was 
aware of the language's block structure: the scope of a macro was only the 
block in which it was defined.  There was little syntactic distinction between 
the SETC and MACRO equivalents.  Evaluation of metasymbols could be either 
performed at the point of macro definition or deferred to the applied 
occurrence.

I understand that BAL had some of that unification; lost in subsequent 
assemblers which distinguish EQU from SETA.

>-Original Message-
>From: Charles Mills
>Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 12:20 PM
>
>Aren't there "generic" meta languages: meta languages that may be used to 
>generate any sort of text, including source code for most any language?

--

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee 
and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader 
of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any 
attachments from your system.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Meta languages [was: RE: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers]

[Seymour J Metz]

> Probably also Wirth's "literate programming" suite, TeX I think it is called.

Two different things, both by Knuth. Wirth was ALGOL W, Pascal and PL360.

> But IMHO none easy to learn or use.

LaTeX, based on TeX, may not be as easy as GML and SCRIPT, but it's not that 
hard to learn and it does a good job dealing with typography.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Farley, Peter x23353 [031df298a9da-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 12:30 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Meta languages [was: RE: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System 
z Servers]

True.  There is m4 in *ix systems and going back a long time there was ML/1 (I 
think there was an academic book published on that one, I think I have a copy 
somewhere around here).  Undoubtedly others I do not know of or remember.

Probably also Wirth's "literate programming" suite, TeX I think it is called.

But IMHO none easy to learn or use.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Charles Mills
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 12:20 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

Aren't there "generic" meta languages: meta languages that may be used to 
generate any sort of text, including source code for most any language?

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 8:47 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

True for the language itself, but at least one ISV addressed that lack -- the 
MetaCOBOL product.  I have forgotten who the original vendor ISV was - maybe 
ADR? -- but I think it now resides somewhere in the CA / Broadcom universe.

IMHO PL/1 (and no doubt the PL/X internal IBM language from the little we see 
of it in SYS1.MACLIB) has the most powerful language-defined preprocessor.  One 
could wish for a similar language-defined capability for COBOL, not that it 
will ever happen.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Charles Mills
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 11:15 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

The literal answer to your question is COPY. Assembler COPY is completely the 
analog of COBOL COPY.

Assembler COPY is less powerful than COBOL COPY: there is no COPY REPLACING in 
assembler.

OTOH, Assembler has macros, which are like COPY but much, much more powerful.

I am going to go out on a limb -- someone will surely correct me -- and say 
that COBOL is unique or at least atypical among modern "powerful" programming 
languages in that it has no real preprocessor language. There is no "meta" 
programming (to speak of) in COBOL. No real way to "dynamically construct" a 
program at compile time.

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Warren Brown
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 7:22 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

 Hello,
I've been away for a while.  What is the assembly language equivalent for a 
COBOL copybook?
Thanks,
Warren
On Monday, March 29, 2021, 11:08:43 AM EDT, Wendell Lovewell 
<01e9c0ee0673-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

 Hello all.

Does anyone know if Dr Ehrman's excellent assembler book could be updated for 
the new instructions released since 2015?  Or, at least refreshed with current 
standards for PDF-page generation standards?

What I mean is, it would really be helpful if:
a) The pages in the Table of Contents were hyperlinks to the actual pages 
referenced, and
b) The page numbers in the TOC matched the page numbers in the PDF file.  For 
example, "MVCLE" is listed in the TOC on page 411.  But if you alt-g to go to 
the 411th page in the PDF, you end up on the page displaying "373" at the 
bottom.

More recent manuals "document" page numbers match the "pdf" page numbers.  But 
as best I can tell Dr. Ehrman's book hasn't been updated to reflect this.

Is there any chance someone from IBM is reading this & can do something about 
this?  Please?

(I know this might make more sense to post on the Assembler list, but I'm 
guessing it's more likely to be seen here.)

TIA,
Wendell
--

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee 
and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader 
of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please 

Re: Meta languages [was: RE: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers]

[Seymour J Metz]

> I understand that BAL had some of that unification; lost in subsequent
> assemblers which distinguish EQU from SETA.

BAL didn't have any metalanguage at all.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Paul Gilmartin [000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 1:02 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Meta languages [was: RE: Assembler Language Programming for IBM 
System z Servers]

On Mon, 5 Apr 2021 16:30:53 +, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:

>True.  There is m4 in *ix systems and going back a long time there was ML/1 (I 
>think there was an academic book published on that one, I think I have a copy 
>somewhere around here).  Undoubtedly others I do not know of or remember.
>
>Probably also Wirth's "literate programming" suite, TeX I think it is called.
>
Knuth?

>But IMHO none easy to learn or use.
>
PL/I addresses ease of use by making the metalanguage similar to the
base language.

My favorite experience was with Mainsail which integrated its metalanguage with
its compiler: not "IF DEFINED()" but "IF DECLARED()".  And the metalanguage
was aware of the language's block structure: the scope of a macro was only
the block in which it was defined.  There was little syntactic distinction 
between
the SETC and MACRO equivalents.  Evaluation of metasymbols could be either
performed at the point of macro definition or deferred to the applied 
occurrence.

I understand that BAL had some of that unification; lost in subsequent
assemblers which distinguish EQU from SETA.

>-Original Message-
>From: Charles Mills
>Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 12:20 PM
>
>Aren't there "generic" meta languages: meta languages that may be used to 
>generate any sort of text, including source code for most any language?

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Meta languages [was: RE: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers]

[Tony Thigpen]

I am helping support a customer that has XBOL which generates COBOL. The 
original developer has passed away, but my client has the source. We 
have had to make changes for 'gone' COBOL verbs and such.


I don't think CA's MetaCobol is currently marketed. I talked to them 
several years ago about it.


I personally wrote and use a COBOL "pre-compiler" that handles a few 
things for me:
1) It let's you specify Working Storage, Linkage Section and Procedural 
Section in any COBOL copybook. It re-orders the generated code so that 
the parts are plugged into the output source in the right order. This 
makes it easy to put things like date routines within the program when 
such routines require working storage fields to do their calculations.
2) It calls 'calls' the CICS pre-processor before generating the final 
code. z/VSE does not have such an option currently.


I do have some more I want to do with it, but have not had the time. I 
would like it to be more "macro like" for such things as BMS screens.


Tony Thigpen

Farley, Peter x23353 wrote on 4/5/21 12:30 PM:

True.  There is m4 in *ix systems and going back a long time there was ML/1 (I 
think there was an academic book published on that one, I think I have a copy 
somewhere around here).  Undoubtedly others I do not know of or remember.

Probably also Wirth's "literate programming" suite, TeX I think it is called.

But IMHO none easy to learn or use.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Charles Mills
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 12:20 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

Aren't there "generic" meta languages: meta languages that may be used to 
generate any sort of text, including source code for most any language?

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 8:47 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

True for the language itself, but at least one ISV addressed that lack -- the 
MetaCOBOL product.  I have forgotten who the original vendor ISV was - maybe 
ADR? -- but I think it now resides somewhere in the CA / Broadcom universe.

IMHO PL/1 (and no doubt the PL/X internal IBM language from the little we see 
of it in SYS1.MACLIB) has the most powerful language-defined preprocessor.  One 
could wish for a similar language-defined capability for COBOL, not that it 
will ever happen.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Charles Mills
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 11:15 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

The literal answer to your question is COPY. Assembler COPY is completely the 
analog of COBOL COPY.

Assembler COPY is less powerful than COBOL COPY: there is no COPY REPLACING in 
assembler.

OTOH, Assembler has macros, which are like COPY but much, much more powerful.

I am going to go out on a limb -- someone will surely correct me -- and say that COBOL is unique or at least 
atypical among modern "powerful" programming languages in that it has no real preprocessor 
language. There is no "meta" programming (to speak of) in COBOL. No real way to "dynamically 
construct" a program at compile time.

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Warren Brown
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 7:22 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

  Hello,
I've been away for a while.  What is the assembly language equivalent for a 
COBOL copybook?
Thanks,
Warren
 On Monday, March 29, 2021, 11:08:43 AM EDT, Wendell Lovewell 
<01e9c0ee0673-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
  
  Hello all.


Does anyone know if Dr Ehrman's excellent assembler book could be updated for 
the new instructions released since 2015?  Or, at least refreshed with current 
standards for PDF-page generation standards?

What I mean is, it would really be helpful if:
a) The pages in the Table of Contents were hyperlinks to the actual pages 
referenced, and
b) The page numbers in the TOC matched the page numbers in the PDF file.  For example, 
"MVCLE" is listed in the TOC on page 411.  But if you alt-g to go to the 411th page in 
the PDF, you end up on the page displaying "373" at the bottom.

More recent manuals "document" page numbers match the "pdf" page numbers.  But 
as best I can tell Dr. Ehrman's book hasn't been updated to reflect this.

Is there any chance someone from IBM is reading this & can do something about 
this?  Please?

(I know this might make more sense to post on the Assembler list, but I'm 
guessing it's more likely to be seen here.)

TIA,
Wendell
--

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the 

Re: Meta languages [was: RE: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers]

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Mon, 5 Apr 2021 16:30:53 +, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:

>True.  There is m4 in *ix systems and going back a long time there was ML/1 (I 
>think there was an academic book published on that one, I think I have a copy 
>somewhere around here).  Undoubtedly others I do not know of or remember.
>
>Probably also Wirth's "literate programming" suite, TeX I think it is called.
> 
Knuth?

>But IMHO none easy to learn or use.
>
PL/I addresses ease of use by making the metalanguage similar to the
base language.

My favorite experience was with Mainsail which integrated its metalanguage with
its compiler: not "IF DEFINED()" but "IF DECLARED()".  And the metalanguage
was aware of the language's block structure: the scope of a macro was only
the block in which it was defined.  There was little syntactic distinction 
between
the SETC and MACRO equivalents.  Evaluation of metasymbols could be either
performed at the point of macro definition or deferred to the applied 
occurrence.

I understand that BAL had some of that unification; lost in subsequent
assemblers which distinguish EQU from SETA.

>-Original Message-
>From: Charles Mills
>Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 12:20 PM
>
>Aren't there "generic" meta languages: meta languages that may be used to 
>generate any sort of text, including source code for most any language?

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Meta languages [was: RE: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers]

[Farley, Peter x23353]

True.  There is m4 in *ix systems and going back a long time there was ML/1 (I 
think there was an academic book published on that one, I think I have a copy 
somewhere around here).  Undoubtedly others I do not know of or remember.

Probably also Wirth's "literate programming" suite, TeX I think it is called.

But IMHO none easy to learn or use.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Charles Mills
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 12:20 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

Aren't there "generic" meta languages: meta languages that may be used to 
generate any sort of text, including source code for most any language?

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 8:47 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

True for the language itself, but at least one ISV addressed that lack -- the 
MetaCOBOL product.  I have forgotten who the original vendor ISV was - maybe 
ADR? -- but I think it now resides somewhere in the CA / Broadcom universe.

IMHO PL/1 (and no doubt the PL/X internal IBM language from the little we see 
of it in SYS1.MACLIB) has the most powerful language-defined preprocessor.  One 
could wish for a similar language-defined capability for COBOL, not that it 
will ever happen.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Charles Mills
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 11:15 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

The literal answer to your question is COPY. Assembler COPY is completely the 
analog of COBOL COPY.

Assembler COPY is less powerful than COBOL COPY: there is no COPY REPLACING in 
assembler.

OTOH, Assembler has macros, which are like COPY but much, much more powerful. 

I am going to go out on a limb -- someone will surely correct me -- and say 
that COBOL is unique or at least atypical among modern "powerful" programming 
languages in that it has no real preprocessor language. There is no "meta" 
programming (to speak of) in COBOL. No real way to "dynamically construct" a 
program at compile time.

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Warren Brown
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 7:22 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

 Hello,
I've been away for a while.  What is the assembly language equivalent for a 
COBOL copybook?
Thanks,
Warren 
On Monday, March 29, 2021, 11:08:43 AM EDT, Wendell Lovewell 
<01e9c0ee0673-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:  
 
 Hello all. 

Does anyone know if Dr Ehrman's excellent assembler book could be updated for 
the new instructions released since 2015?  Or, at least refreshed with current 
standards for PDF-page generation standards? 

What I mean is, it would really be helpful if:
a) The pages in the Table of Contents were hyperlinks to the actual pages 
referenced, and
b) The page numbers in the TOC matched the page numbers in the PDF file.  For 
example, "MVCLE" is listed in the TOC on page 411.  But if you alt-g to go to 
the 411th page in the PDF, you end up on the page displaying "373" at the 
bottom.  

More recent manuals "document" page numbers match the "pdf" page numbers.  But 
as best I can tell Dr. Ehrman's book hasn't been updated to reflect this. 

Is there any chance someone from IBM is reading this & can do something about 
this?  Please? 

(I know this might make more sense to post on the Assembler list, but I'm 
guessing it's more likely to be seen here.)

TIA,
Wendell
--

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee 
and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader 
of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any 
attachments from your system.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

[Charles Mills]

Aren't there "generic" meta languages: meta languages that may be used to 
generate any sort of text, including source code for most any language?

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 8:47 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

True for the language itself, but at least one ISV addressed that lack -- the 
MetaCOBOL product.  I have forgotten who the original vendor ISV was - maybe 
ADR? -- but I think it now resides somewhere in the CA / Broadcom universe.

IMHO PL/1 (and no doubt the PL/X internal IBM language from the little we see 
of it in SYS1.MACLIB) has the most powerful language-defined preprocessor.  One 
could wish for a similar language-defined capability for COBOL, not that it 
will ever happen.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Charles Mills
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 11:15 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

EXTERNAL EMAIL

The literal answer to your question is COPY. Assembler COPY is completely the 
analog of COBOL COPY.

Assembler COPY is less powerful than COBOL COPY: there is no COPY REPLACING in 
assembler.

OTOH, Assembler has macros, which are like COPY but much, much more powerful. 

I am going to go out on a limb -- someone will surely correct me -- and say 
that COBOL is unique or at least atypical among modern "powerful" programming 
languages in that it has no real preprocessor language. There is no "meta" 
programming (to speak of) in COBOL. No real way to "dynamically construct" a 
program at compile time.

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Warren Brown
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 7:22 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

 Hello,
I've been away for a while.  What is the assembly language equivalent for a 
COBOL copybook?
Thanks,
Warren 
On Monday, March 29, 2021, 11:08:43 AM EDT, Wendell Lovewell 
<01e9c0ee0673-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:  
 
 Hello all. 

Does anyone know if Dr Ehrman's excellent assembler book could be updated for 
the new instructions released since 2015?  Or, at least refreshed with current 
standards for PDF-page generation standards? 

What I mean is, it would really be helpful if:
a) The pages in the Table of Contents were hyperlinks to the actual pages 
referenced, and
b) The page numbers in the TOC matched the page numbers in the PDF file.  For 
example, "MVCLE" is listed in the TOC on page 411.  But if you alt-g to go to 
the 411th page in the PDF, you end up on the page displaying "373" at the 
bottom.  

More recent manuals "document" page numbers match the "pdf" page numbers.  But 
as best I can tell Dr. Ehrman's book hasn't been updated to reflect this. 

Is there any chance someone from IBM is reading this & can do something about 
this?  Please? 

(I know this might make more sense to post on the Assembler list, but I'm 
guessing it's more likely to be seen here.)

TIA,
Wendell

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
  

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee 
and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader 
of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any 
attachments from your system.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

[Farley, Peter x23353]

True for the language itself, but at least one ISV addressed that lack -- the 
MetaCOBOL product.  I have forgotten who the original vendor ISV was - maybe 
ADR? -- but I think it now resides somewhere in the CA / Broadcom universe.

IMHO PL/1 (and no doubt the PL/X internal IBM language from the little we see 
of it in SYS1.MACLIB) has the most powerful language-defined preprocessor.  One 
could wish for a similar language-defined capability for COBOL, not that it 
will ever happen.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Charles Mills
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 11:15 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

EXTERNAL EMAIL

The literal answer to your question is COPY. Assembler COPY is completely the 
analog of COBOL COPY.

Assembler COPY is less powerful than COBOL COPY: there is no COPY REPLACING in 
assembler.

OTOH, Assembler has macros, which are like COPY but much, much more powerful. 

I am going to go out on a limb -- someone will surely correct me -- and say 
that COBOL is unique or at least atypical among modern "powerful" programming 
languages in that it has no real preprocessor language. There is no "meta" 
programming (to speak of) in COBOL. No real way to "dynamically construct" a 
program at compile time.

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Warren Brown
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 7:22 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

 Hello,
I've been away for a while.  What is the assembly language equivalent for a 
COBOL copybook?
Thanks,
Warren 
On Monday, March 29, 2021, 11:08:43 AM EDT, Wendell Lovewell 
<01e9c0ee0673-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:  
 
 Hello all. 

Does anyone know if Dr Ehrman's excellent assembler book could be updated for 
the new instructions released since 2015?  Or, at least refreshed with current 
standards for PDF-page generation standards? 

What I mean is, it would really be helpful if:
a) The pages in the Table of Contents were hyperlinks to the actual pages 
referenced, and
b) The page numbers in the TOC matched the page numbers in the PDF file.  For 
example, "MVCLE" is listed in the TOC on page 411.  But if you alt-g to go to 
the 411th page in the PDF, you end up on the page displaying "373" at the 
bottom.  

More recent manuals "document" page numbers match the "pdf" page numbers.  But 
as best I can tell Dr. Ehrman's book hasn't been updated to reflect this. 

Is there any chance someone from IBM is reading this & can do something about 
this?  Please? 

(I know this might make more sense to post on the Assembler list, but I'm 
guessing it's more likely to be seen here.)

TIA,
Wendell

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
  

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee 
and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader 
of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any 
attachments from your system.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

[Charles Mills]

The literal answer to your question is COPY. Assembler COPY is completely the 
analog of COBOL COPY.

Assembler COPY is less powerful than COBOL COPY: there is no COPY REPLACING in 
assembler.

OTOH, Assembler has macros, which are like COPY but much, much more powerful. 

I am going to go out on a limb -- someone will surely correct me -- and say 
that COBOL is unique or at least atypical among modern "powerful" programming 
languages in that it has no real preprocessor language. There is no "meta" 
programming (to speak of) in COBOL. No real way to "dynamically construct" a 
program at compile time.

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Warren Brown
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 7:22 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

 Hello,
I've been away for a while.  What is the assembly language equivalent for a 
COBOL copybook?
Thanks,
Warren 
On Monday, March 29, 2021, 11:08:43 AM EDT, Wendell Lovewell 
<01e9c0ee0673-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:  
 
 Hello all. 

Does anyone know if Dr Ehrman's excellent assembler book could be updated for 
the new instructions released since 2015?  Or, at least refreshed with current 
standards for PDF-page generation standards? 

What I mean is, it would really be helpful if:
a) The pages in the Table of Contents were hyperlinks to the actual pages 
referenced, and
b) The page numbers in the TOC matched the page numbers in the PDF file.  For 
example, "MVCLE" is listed in the TOC on page 411.  But if you alt-g to go to 
the 411th page in the PDF, you end up on the page displaying "373" at the 
bottom.  

More recent manuals "document" page numbers match the "pdf" page numbers.  But 
as best I can tell Dr. Ehrman's book hasn't been updated to reflect this. 

Is there any chance someone from IBM is reading this & can do something about 
this?  Please? 

(I know this might make more sense to post on the Assembler list, but I'm 
guessing it's more likely to be seen here.)

TIA, 
Wendell

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
  

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Low softcapping on high capacity CEC

[Steve Emge]

> I appreciate the help and suggestions. And, if SAS was the only culprit, I'd 
> work at isolating SAS. . . .

As a side note, there is a very bad performance defect [as designed] with SAS 
ODS Excel on z/OS.  There is very significant CPU consumption with creation of 
large ODS Excel documents to the point I would have preferred to have a means 
of disabling capability to use ODS Excel.   I believe I had report this with 
SAS for z/OS TS1M4, maybe M3, but it has yet to be addressed.

Regards,
Steve

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

[Ramsey Hallman]

Warren, that depends slightly.  Put a member in some MACLIB.  If it is
truly a copybook, then COPY   member (not in column 1, I usually put COPY
in 10 and member in 16).  If it is truly a macro, then just specify the
name, like IHAPSA  DSECT=YES and it will expand (again not in column 1).

Ramsey

On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 9:21 AM Warren Brown  wrote:

>  Hello,
> I've been away for a while.  What is the assembly language equivalent for
> a COBOL copybook?
> Thanks,
> Warren
> On Monday, March 29, 2021, 11:08:43 AM EDT, Wendell Lovewell <
> 01e9c0ee0673-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>
>  Hello all.
>
> Does anyone know if Dr Ehrman's excellent assembler book could be updated
> for the new instructions released since 2015?  Or, at least refreshed with
> current standards for PDF-page generation standards?
>
> What I mean is, it would really be helpful if:
> a) The pages in the Table of Contents were hyperlinks to the actual pages
> referenced, and
> b) The page numbers in the TOC matched the page numbers in the PDF file.
> For example, "MVCLE" is listed in the TOC on page 411.  But if you alt-g to
> go to the 411th page in the PDF, you end up on the page displaying "373" at
> the bottom.
>
> More recent manuals "document" page numbers match the "pdf" page numbers.
> But as best I can tell Dr. Ehrman's book hasn't been updated to reflect
> this.
>
> Is there any chance someone from IBM is reading this & can do something
> about this?  Please?
>
> (I know this might make more sense to post on the Assembler list, but I'm
> guessing it's more likely to be seen here.)
>
> TIA,
> Wendell
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Assembler Language Programming for IBM System z Servers

[Warren Brown]

 Hello,
I've been away for a while.  What is the assembly language equivalent for a 
COBOL copybook?
Thanks,
Warren 
On Monday, March 29, 2021, 11:08:43 AM EDT, Wendell Lovewell 
<01e9c0ee0673-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:  
 
 Hello all. 

Does anyone know if Dr Ehrman's excellent assembler book could be updated for 
the new instructions released since 2015?  Or, at least refreshed with current 
standards for PDF-page generation standards? 

What I mean is, it would really be helpful if:
a) The pages in the Table of Contents were hyperlinks to the actual pages 
referenced, and
b) The page numbers in the TOC matched the page numbers in the PDF file.  For 
example, "MVCLE" is listed in the TOC on page 411.  But if you alt-g to go to 
the 411th page in the PDF, you end up on the page displaying "373" at the 
bottom.  

More recent manuals "document" page numbers match the "pdf" page numbers.  But 
as best I can tell Dr. Ehrman's book hasn't been updated to reflect this. 

Is there any chance someone from IBM is reading this & can do something about 
this?  Please? 

(I know this might make more sense to post on the Assembler list, but I'm 
guessing it's more likely to be seen here.)

TIA, 
Wendell

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
  

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS lifecycle

[Kurt Quackenbush]

Is this the page you're looking for? (mind the wrap)
https://www-01.ibm.com/common/ssi/cgi-bin/ssialias?infotype=dd=sm=ShopzSeries=897/ENUS5650-ZOS

Kurt Quackenbush -- IBM, SMP/E Development
Chuck Norris never uses CHECK when he applies PTFs.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Websphere for z/OS

[Schneck, Glenn]

Good morning.  I am not sure if this is the appropriate list but I didn't 
really see one for Websphere.

I have an error coming out at startup where the system is looking for a .java 
directory and can't find it in the location identified in a RACF error message 
(MKDIR command).  However there is one that exists in a lower directory.  Where 
is this patch specified in WAS?

TIA,

Glenn

Glenn Schneck
USDC Manager 1 - GPS
Deloitte Consulting LLP
901 International Parkway, STE 100
Lake Mary, FL 32746
Tel/Direct: +1 407-438-8809 | Fax: +1 866-396-3121 | Mobile: +1 321-279-3535
gschn...@deloitte.com| www.deloitte.com

Please consider the environment before printing.


This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information 
intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If you 
are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and any 
disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any 
action based on it, by you is strictly prohibited.

Deloitte refers to a Deloitte member firm, one of its related entities, or 
Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited ("DTTL"). Each Deloitte member firm is a 
separate legal entity and a member of DTTL. DTTL does not provide services to 
clients. Please see www.deloitte.com/about to learn more.

v.E.1

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: [External] Re: No file permissions or super user authority for executing a shell script

[Pommier, Rex]

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Saturday, April 3, 2021 8:23 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: [External] Re: No file permissions or super user authority for 
executing a shell script

On Fri, 2 Apr 2021 13:26:07 +, Pommier, Rex wrote:
>
>I'm asking this from a "I don't know" standpoint because I've never used them. 
> Doesn't RACF have extended ACLs that could possibly come into play here?  As 
>in using RACF to grant read or execute authority to the script?  If so, how 
>would that be shown?  I would assume that the "normal" Unix security would 
>remain at 700 but the extended ACL would allow the access and show up 
>elsewhere?
>
But allowing access in that fashion seems to violate POSIX:

https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/basedefs/V1_chap04.html#tag_04_05

 4.5 File Access Permissions
 ...
Implementations may provide additional or alternate file access control 
mechanisms, or both.
An additional access control mechanism shall only further restrict the 
access permissions
defined by the file permission bits.  ...

-- gil


Hi Gil,

Thanks for that bit of information.  As I stated, I've never used ACLs but what 
you're saying makes sense.

Rex

The information contained in this message is confidential, protected from 
disclosure and may be legally privileged.  If the reader of this message is not 
the intended recipient or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this 
message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, 
distribution, copying, or any action taken or action omitted in reliance on it, 
is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this 
message and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard 
copy format.  Thank you.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Debugging "A high error rate was detected on the Optical Link network." HMC alert

[Christian Svensson]

Good day,

Recently I have been getting these kinds of alerts from my HMC. It all
started when I connected an old DS6800 and the details are:

Node 1
Machine: 2498-B40
Serial: IBMCA107312B
Physical Interface: 6620
Logical Interface: 0020

Node 2
Machine: 1750-511
Serial: IBM13715
Physical Interface: 0100
Logical Interface: 

I keep getting these errors about 3-4 per day with the exact same
interfaces specified. No others, just these.

When I look at the referenced SAN switch and I do a "porterrshow" things
seem fine:
  frames  enccrccrctootoobadenc   disc
  link   loss   loss   frjt   fbsy  c3timeoutpcs
   tx rx  inerrg_eof  shrt   long   eof out   c3
 failsync   sig  txrx err
 20:4.8m  46.9k   0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0
   0  2  2  0  0  0  0  0
 32:   27.5k  17.7k   0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0
   0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0
 33:   19.3k  13.6k   0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0
   0  0  1  0  0  0  0  0
 36:   78 79  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0
   0  0  1  1  0  0  0  0
 37:   56 57  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0
   0  0  0  1  0  0  0  0

I assume the interface given in the alert is in hex, so the error would be
about port 32 (which is indeed connected to the DS6800 controller 1, port
0).
As you can see the port seems to be fine.

The full portshow 32 is here:
portIndex:  32
portName: port32
portHealth: HEALTHY

Authentication: None
portDisableReason: None
portCFlags: 0x1
portFlags: 0x1020b03 PRESENT ACTIVE F_PORT G_PORT U_PORT LOGICAL_ONLINE
LOGIN NOELP ACCEPT FLOGI
LocalSwcFlags: 0x0
portType:  17.0
POD Port: Port is licensed
portState: 1Online
Protocol: FC
portPhys:  6In_Sync portScn:   32   F_Port
port generation number:16
state transition count:3

portId:662000
portIfId:43020017
portWwn:   20:20:00:05:1e:e8:74:30
portWwn of device(s) connected:
50:05:07:63:0e:80:02:11
Distance:  normal
portSpeed: N2Gbps

Credit Recovery: Inactive
Aoq: Inactive
FAA: Inactive
F_Trunk: Inactive
LE domain: 0
Peer beacon: Off
FC Fastwrite: OFF
Interrupts:0  Link_failure: 0  Frjt: 0
Unknown:   0  Loss_of_sync: 0  Fbsy: 0
Lli:   15 Loss_of_sig:  0
Proc_rqrd: 63 Protocol_err: 0
Timed_out: 0  Invalid_word: 0
Rx_flushed:0  Invalid_crc:  0
Tx_unavail:0  Delim_err:0
Free_buffer:   0  Address_err:  0
Overrun:   0  Lr_in:3
Suspended: 0  Lr_out:   0
Parity_err:0  Ols_in:   0
2_parity_err:  0  Ols_out:  3
CMI_bus_err:   0

As far as I can tell the port is doing just fine, and I have not received
any reports of connectivity issues to the actual DASDs.
Any suggestions on what is going on, or worst case - how I can disable
these alerts?

Regards,

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN