date:20200609

LOL - you may just have made my tagline file, Bill.  We'll see whether I still 
like it well enough tomorrow.  Like this:

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

The problem with journalism today is everyone thinks they are one  -Bill 
Johnson in the listserv IBM-MAIN

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Bill Johnson
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 20:20

I sent the author of this hit piece a few real journalistic pieces which 
contradicted her claims. She responded kindly and stated she would do more 
research (or any research in my opinion) if she did another mainframe piece. 
The problem with journalism today is everyone thinks they are one, and sites 
like tech republic are only interested in clicks & eyeballs to monetize the 
material.

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

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

Appropriate tagline:

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* Most people thought [in 2000] that Web content should somehow be free,
a hopelessly naïve ideology known today as dot-communism....Dot-communism
has been discarded along with its political counterpart, as users find that
the adjective free means, as it always does, paid for by someone else,
who insists on getting it back one way or another.  -David S Platt,
"Introducing Microsoft .NET, Third Edition", 2003 */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Seymour J Metz
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 20:16

I wish. GMU is using proprietary e-mail software and no longer allows access
via POP3 or IMAP4.


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of
Farley, Peter x23353 [peter.far...@broadridge.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:53 PM

Add to that the open-source mindset that software SHOULD BY RIGHT be "free"
and you have a tough market to break into (again) from a for-profit company
perspective.

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

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

Yep.  We used to get a lot of errors for out of volumes in a storage
groups, and the users would want us to add more volumes.  For several
calls I would point out that the data set had a very small primary and
secondary space value.  I would go through all the extents on one
volume, then proceed through the rest, and run out volumes despite
lots of space in the storage group.  They didn't want to reallocate,
so I suggested they migrate and recall the dataset.  Then the existing
space would be in 1 extent on 1 volume and plenty of extents and
volumes to extend onto.  The problem started going away after that.

Would the new 1st extent on the first volume from the recall become
the default 1st allocation on subsequent volumes?

On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 12:48 AM Seymour J Metz  wrote:
>
> My pet peeve is the default for SPACE; "Absolute track not available" is not 
> a user friendly error message for forgetting to specify SPACE.
>
>
> --
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
>
> 
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
> Bob Bridges [robhbrid...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:33 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"
>
> JCL: I used to complain about JCL's arcane and in some cases backward syntax. 
>  I mean, "COND=(0,LT,step.procstep)" - who made that up?  But somehow over 
> the years I've made my peace with JCL.  It is what it is.  And I would have 
> done no better, back then.
>
> EBCDIC: A couple of years ago, when I was employed by a small mainframe 
> security consulting company, a client came to them asking for help with a 
> project to create a security product that would reside on a distributed 
> platform but handle security on the mainframe.  They were going to develop it 
> for a client that was using Top Secret, but it could have been any of the 
> three.  These folks didn't know mainframes, which is why they hired my 
> employers, who assigned me to the project.
>
> I said they "didn't know mainframes"; let's start with the fact that they 
> didn't know about EBCDIC.  But that's no problem, right?  There are lots of 
> things one can do to translate between EBCDIC and ASCII.  In the process of 
> working on this project I wrote, my very own self, a socket server that would 
> handle both ASCII and EBCDIC clients.  (I mention this because I'd never done 
> any such thing before, and I was inordinately pleased with the fact that I 
> could do anything so cool.  Those of you who've done hundreds of those and 
> take it for granted, please don't burst my bubble.)
>
> Then they discovered the whole issue of 3270 emulation.  And I probably 
> wasn't helping by trying to explain the complexities of mainframe security at 
> about the same time.  The client went away to think about the communications 
> issue, and somehow they never came back; the project never went anywhere 
> after that.
>
> ---
> Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313
>
> /* Always look a gift horse in the mouth.  It may have hoof-and-mouth 
> disease.  -Bob Bridges, 1977 */
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
> Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
> Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 19:18
> >
> Yes, but JCL.  JCL is to programming as Roman numerals are to arithmetic.
>
> And EBCDIC.  "Doesn't play well with others."
>
> --
> 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



-- 
Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA
Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all?

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

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread Edward Finnell

IBM used to offer HESC for VM .edus. There were different tiers but it was very 
cheap. We used it until they quit offering it. Well it's a long story IBM just 
stuck it's head in the ground and let the *nix assimilate.

In a message dated 6/9/2020 2:22:17 PM Central Standard Time, 
t...@tombrennansoftware.com writes:
I always thought that 
was super smart of them.  What I always thought was rather dumb, is that 
IBM doesn't do similar with educational use of all their software.  And 
that's just copied bits ... no wood, metal, delivery, tuning, etc.

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

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

My pet peeve is the default for SPACE; "Absolute track not available" is not a 
user friendly error message for forgetting to specify SPACE.


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


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Bob 
Bridges [robhbrid...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:33 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

JCL: I used to complain about JCL's arcane and in some cases backward syntax.  
I mean, "COND=(0,LT,step.procstep)" - who made that up?  But somehow over the 
years I've made my peace with JCL.  It is what it is.  And I would have done no 
better, back then.

EBCDIC: A couple of years ago, when I was employed by a small mainframe 
security consulting company, a client came to them asking for help with a 
project to create a security product that would reside on a distributed 
platform but handle security on the mainframe.  They were going to develop it 
for a client that was using Top Secret, but it could have been any of the 
three.  These folks didn't know mainframes, which is why they hired my 
employers, who assigned me to the project.

I said they "didn't know mainframes"; let's start with the fact that they 
didn't know about EBCDIC.  But that's no problem, right?  There are lots of 
things one can do to translate between EBCDIC and ASCII.  In the process of 
working on this project I wrote, my very own self, a socket server that would 
handle both ASCII and EBCDIC clients.  (I mention this because I'd never done 
any such thing before, and I was inordinately pleased with the fact that I 
could do anything so cool.  Those of you who've done hundreds of those and take 
it for granted, please don't burst my bubble.)

Then they discovered the whole issue of 3270 emulation.  And I probably wasn't 
helping by trying to explain the complexities of mainframe security at about 
the same time.  The client went away to think about the communications issue, 
and somehow they never came back; the project never went anywhere after that.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* Always look a gift horse in the mouth.  It may have hoof-and-mouth disease.  
-Bob Bridges, 1977 */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 19:18
>
Yes, but JCL.  JCL is to programming as Roman numerals are to arithmetic.

And EBCDIC.  "Doesn't play well with others."

--
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: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

JCL: I used to complain about JCL's arcane and in some cases backward syntax.  
I mean, "COND=(0,LT,step.procstep)" - who made that up?  But somehow over the 
years I've made my peace with JCL.  It is what it is.  And I would have done no 
better, back then.

EBCDIC: A couple of years ago, when I was employed by a small mainframe 
security consulting company, a client came to them asking for help with a 
project to create a security product that would reside on a distributed 
platform but handle security on the mainframe.  They were going to develop it 
for a client that was using Top Secret, but it could have been any of the 
three.  These folks didn't know mainframes, which is why they hired my 
employers, who assigned me to the project.

I said they "didn't know mainframes"; let's start with the fact that they 
didn't know about EBCDIC.  But that's no problem, right?  There are lots of 
things one can do to translate between EBCDIC and ASCII.  In the process of 
working on this project I wrote, my very own self, a socket server that would 
handle both ASCII and EBCDIC clients.  (I mention this because I'd never done 
any such thing before, and I was inordinately pleased with the fact that I 
could do anything so cool.  Those of you who've done hundreds of those and take 
it for granted, please don't burst my bubble.)

Then they discovered the whole issue of 3270 emulation.  And I probably wasn't 
helping by trying to explain the complexities of mainframe security at about 
the same time.  The client went away to think about the communications issue, 
and somehow they never came back; the project never went anywhere after that.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* Always look a gift horse in the mouth.  It may have hoof-and-mouth disease.  
-Bob Bridges, 1977 */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 19:18
> 
Yes, but JCL.  JCL is to programming as Roman numerals are to arithmetic.

And EBCDIC.  "Doesn't play well with others."

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

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread Bill Johnson

I sent the author of this hit piece a few real journalistic pieces which 
contradicted her claims. She responded kindly and stated she would do more 
research (or any research in my opinion) if she did another mainframe piece. 
The problem with journalism today is everyone thinks they are one, and sites 
like tech republic are only interested in clicks & eyeballs to monetize the 
material.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Tuesday, June 9, 2020, 7:17 PM, Paul Gilmartin 
<000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 21:53:51 +, Farley, Peter  wrote:

>You're probably correct about the academic mindset and IBM's failure to 
>successfully market to them that the mainframe CAN do all the "cool" things 
>they perceive as the latest-and-greatest-idea(s), and is actively "keeping up" 
>with the best of those ideas.
> 
Yes, but JCL.  JCL is to programming as Roman numerals are to arithmetic.

And EBCDIC.  "Doesn't play well with others."

>Add to that the opensoource mindset that software SHOULD BY RIGHT be "free" 
>and you have a tough market to break into (again) from a for-profit company 
>perspective.
>
>The 20th century "80% discount" that IBM offered to academic institutions 
>pre-consent-decree would today probably be laughed right out of the Bursar's 
>or Treasurer's office.  20% of too-much-already is a lot more than they pay 
>for the little hardware beasts and the nothing they pay for the software that 
>runs on them.
>
>It's a tough sell now.  Would have been worlds easier if addressed 
>intelligently back then and continued into this century.
>
>It was an IBM chairman who declared o  investors that "IBM will never be in a 
>low-margin business".  They are getting what they asked for.

-- 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: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

> Add to that the open-source mindset that software SHOULD BY RIGHT be "free"

I wish. GMU is using proprietary e-mail software and no longer allows access 
via POP3 or IMAP4.


--
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 [peter.far...@broadridge.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:53 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

You're probably correct about the academic mindset and IBM's failure to 
successfully market to them that the mainframe CAN do all the "cool" things 
they perceive as the latest-and-greatest-idea(s), and is actively "keeping up" 
with the best of those ideas.

Add to that the open-source mindset that software SHOULD BY RIGHT be "free" and 
you have a tough market to break into (again) from a for-profit company 
perspective.

The 20th century "80% discount" that IBM offered to academic institutions 
pre-consent-decree would today probably be laughed right out of the Bursar's or 
Treasurer's office.  20% of too-much-already is a lot more than they pay for 
the little hardware beasts and the nothing they pay for the software that runs 
on them.

It's a tough sell now.  Would have been worlds easier if addressed 
intelligently back then and continued into this century.

It was an IBM chairman who declared to investors that "IBM will never be in a 
low-margin business".  They are getting what they asked for.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Bob 
Bridges
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:27 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

I don't pay much attention to IBM's marketing practices so I can't opine 
knowledgeably, but I offer this counter, a story I'm sure I've told here 
before:  Some years ago my oldest son got interested in learning mainframes.  
(I think he must have heard me rant too often about my increasing job security, 
due to colleges ignoring mainframes and thus making old fogies like me less and 
less replaceable even as our salaries keep rising.)  So I started asking 
around:  Where might I rent a couple of mainframe IDs on a commercial data 
center, and how much might I pay for it?  I figured I'd start coaching him in 
the basics, and see how far his interest went.

I didn't make a big campaign of it, but I called here and there for a few 
weeks.  My questions must have gotten around, because one evening I got a call 
from someone at IBM with a very direct offer:  If I would contact my local 
university and get them to run a few classes in mainframes - almost any 
relevant class - the university would rent space at a data center and IBM would 
~give~ me two accounts that I could use to teach my son.  Heck, I could teach a 
class or two myself.

I called NC A State U, where I'd worked a couple years.  Couldn't arouse any 
interest.

Could be IBM isn't marketing themselves very strenuously.  Could be they're not 
losing market share and don't need to.  I don't know.  But it sounds to me like 
they're doing ~something~ at any rate.  But as far as I can tell, the colleges 
have this notion that mainframes are out of date, and can't get out of that 
mindset or notice the facts.

---

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Tom Brennan
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:54

When I bought my Yamaha piano in 1989, I heard a story that Yamaha had been 
supplying free pianos to universities for years.  It was more than them just 
being nice, they knew that someone practicing every day on the school grand 
piano would likely go on to buy one, or be the decision maker for an orchestra, 
night club, or whatever.  I always thought that was super smart of them.  What 
I always thought was rather dumb, is that IBM doesn't do similar with 
educational use of all their software.  And that's just copied bits ... no 
wood, metal, delivery, tuning, etc.
--

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

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread Paul Gilmartin

On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 21:53:51 +, Farley, Peter  wrote:

>You're probably correct about the academic mindset and IBM's failure to 
>successfully market to them that the mainframe CAN do all the "cool" things 
>they perceive as the latest-and-greatest-idea(s), and is actively "keeping up" 
>with the best of those ideas.
> 
Yes, but JCL.  JCL is to programming as Roman numerals are to arithmetic.

And EBCDIC.  "Doesn't play well with others."

>Add to that the opensoource mindset that software SHOULD BY RIGHT be "free" 
>and you have a tough market to break into (again) from a for-profit company 
>perspective.
>
>The 20th century "80% discount" that IBM offered to academic institutions 
>pre-consent-decree would today probably be laughed right out of the Bursar's 
>or Treasurer's office.  20% of too-much-already is a lot more than they pay 
>for the little hardware beasts and the nothing they pay for the software that 
>runs on them.
>
>It's a tough sell now.  Would have been worlds easier if addressed 
>intelligently back then and continued into this century.
>
>It was an IBM chairman who declared o  investors that "IBM will never be in a 
>low-margin business".  They are getting what they asked for.

-- gil

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

Re: COBOL Question

2020-06-09 Thread Steve Beaver

I liked Panvalet.  

Sent from my iPhone

I promise you I can’t type or
Spell on any smartphone 

> On Jun 9, 2020, at 15:53, David Spiegel  wrote:
> 
> +1 sleazy-freaking-trieve.
> (I used to support it, Panvalet and Librarian)
> 
>> On 2020-06-09 16:27, Joe Monk wrote:
>> "Easytrieve plus"
>> 
>> You mean sleazytrieve plus? :)
>> 
>> There was also DYL280 and QUIKJOB.
>> 
>> Joe
>> 
>>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 12:55 PM Mike Schwab  wrote:
>>> 
>>> 4GL - I've used Telon which takes a screen layout and database layout
>>> and generates the cobol code and editing rules.  ADR-Datacom had Ideal
>>> which was similar, later CA.  Easytrieve plus I really liked,
>>> especially the report generation part.
>>> 
>>> --
>>> 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: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread Ron Wells

Unfortunate IBM does not offer systems or training for schools. The flood of 
kids knowing what it is vs the teachings that go on today, I would say you 
would see a swing back...over night..

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Bob 
Bridges
Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2020 4:27 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

** EXTERNAL EMAIL - USE CAUTION **

I don't pay much attention to IBM's marketing practices so I can't opine 
knowledgeably, but I offer this counter, a story I'm sure I've told here 
before:  Some years ago my oldest son got interested in learning mainframes.  
(I think he must have heard me rant too often about my increasing job security, 
due to colleges ignoring mainframes and thus making old fogies like me less and 
less replaceable even as our salaries keep rising.)  So I started asking 
around:  Where might I rent a couple of mainframe IDs on a commercial data 
center, and how much might I pay for it?  I figured I'd start coaching him in 
the basics, and see how far his interest went.

I didn't make a big campaign of it, but I called here and there for a few 
weeks.  My questions must have gotten around, because one evening I got a call 
from someone at IBM with a very direct offer:  If I would contact my local 
university and get them to run a few classes in mainframes - almost any 
relevant class - the university would rent space at a data center and IBM would 
~give~ me two accounts that I could use to teach my son.  Heck, I could teach a 
class or two myself.

I called NC A State U, where I'd worked a couple years.  Couldn't arouse any 
interest.

Could be IBM isn't marketing themselves very strenuously.  Could be they're not 
losing market share and don't need to.  I don't know.  But it sounds to me like 
they're doing ~something~ at any rate.  But as far as I can tell, the colleges 
have this notion that mainframes are out of date, and can't get out of that 
mindset or notice the facts.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* In religion, as in war and everything else, comfort is the one thing you 
cannot get by looking for it.  If you look for truth, you may find comfort in 
the end; if you look for comfort you will not get either comfort or truth — 
only soft soap and wishful thinking to begin with and, in the end, despair.  
-CS Lewis in _The Case for Christianity_ */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Tom Brennan
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:54

When I bought my Yamaha piano in 1989, I heard a story that Yamaha had been 
supplying free pianos to universities for years.  It was more than them just 
being nice, they knew that someone practicing every day on the school grand 
piano would likely go on to buy one, or be the decision maker for an orchestra, 
night club, or whatever.  I always thought that was super smart of them.  What 
I always thought was rather dumb, is that IBM doesn't do similar with 
educational use of all their software.  And that's just copied bits ... no 
wood, metal, delivery, tuning, etc.

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

Email Disclaimer

This E-mail contains confidential information belonging to the sender, which 
may be legally privileged information. This information is intended only for 
the use of the individual or entity addressed above. If you are not the 
intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering it to 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, 
distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of the 
E-mail or attached files is strictly prohibited.

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

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

You're probably correct about the academic mindset and IBM's failure to 
successfully market to them that the mainframe CAN do all the "cool" things 
they perceive as the latest-and-greatest-idea(s), and is actively "keeping up" 
with the best of those ideas.

Add to that the open-source mindset that software SHOULD BY RIGHT be "free" and 
you have a tough market to break into (again) from a for-profit company 
perspective.

The 20th century "80% discount" that IBM offered to academic institutions 
pre-consent-decree would today probably be laughed right out of the Bursar's or 
Treasurer's office.  20% of too-much-already is a lot more than they pay for 
the little hardware beasts and the nothing they pay for the software that runs 
on them.

It's a tough sell now.  Would have been worlds easier if addressed 
intelligently back then and continued into this century.

It was an IBM chairman who declared to investors that "IBM will never be in a 
low-margin business".  They are getting what they asked for.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Bob 
Bridges
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:27 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

I don't pay much attention to IBM's marketing practices so I can't opine 
knowledgeably, but I offer this counter, a story I'm sure I've told here 
before:  Some years ago my oldest son got interested in learning mainframes.  
(I think he must have heard me rant too often about my increasing job security, 
due to colleges ignoring mainframes and thus making old fogies like me less and 
less replaceable even as our salaries keep rising.)  So I started asking 
around:  Where might I rent a couple of mainframe IDs on a commercial data 
center, and how much might I pay for it?  I figured I'd start coaching him in 
the basics, and see how far his interest went.

I didn't make a big campaign of it, but I called here and there for a few 
weeks.  My questions must have gotten around, because one evening I got a call 
from someone at IBM with a very direct offer:  If I would contact my local 
university and get them to run a few classes in mainframes - almost any 
relevant class - the university would rent space at a data center and IBM would 
~give~ me two accounts that I could use to teach my son.  Heck, I could teach a 
class or two myself.

I called NC A State U, where I'd worked a couple years.  Couldn't arouse any 
interest.

Could be IBM isn't marketing themselves very strenuously.  Could be they're not 
losing market share and don't need to.  I don't know.  But it sounds to me like 
they're doing ~something~ at any rate.  But as far as I can tell, the colleges 
have this notion that mainframes are out of date, and can't get out of that 
mindset or notice the facts.

---

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Tom Brennan
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:54

When I bought my Yamaha piano in 1989, I heard a story that Yamaha had been 
supplying free pianos to universities for years.  It was more than them just 
being nice, they knew that someone practicing every day on the school grand 
piano would likely go on to buy one, or be the decision maker for an orchestra, 
night club, or whatever.  I always thought that was super smart of them.  What 
I always thought was rather dumb, is that IBM doesn't do similar with 
educational use of all their software.  And that's just copied bits ... no 
wood, metal, delivery, tuning, etc.
--

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: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

I don't pay much attention to IBM's marketing practices so I can't opine 
knowledgeably, but I offer this counter, a story I'm sure I've told here 
before:  Some years ago my oldest son got interested in learning mainframes.  
(I think he must have heard me rant too often about my increasing job security, 
due to colleges ignoring mainframes and thus making old fogies like me less and 
less replaceable even as our salaries keep rising.)  So I started asking 
around:  Where might I rent a couple of mainframe IDs on a commercial data 
center, and how much might I pay for it?  I figured I'd start coaching him in 
the basics, and see how far his interest went.

I didn't make a big campaign of it, but I called here and there for a few 
weeks.  My questions must have gotten around, because one evening I got a call 
from someone at IBM with a very direct offer:  If I would contact my local 
university and get them to run a few classes in mainframes - almost any 
relevant class - the university would rent space at a data center and IBM would 
~give~ me two accounts that I could use to teach my son.  Heck, I could teach a 
class or two myself.

I called NC A State U, where I'd worked a couple years.  Couldn't arouse any 
interest.

Could be IBM isn't marketing themselves very strenuously.  Could be they're not 
losing market share and don't need to.  I don't know.  But it sounds to me like 
they're doing ~something~ at any rate.  But as far as I can tell, the colleges 
have this notion that mainframes are out of date, and can't get out of that 
mindset or notice the facts.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* In religion, as in war and everything else, comfort is the one thing you 
cannot get by looking for it.  If you look for truth, you may find comfort in 
the end; if you look for comfort you will not get either comfort or truth — 
only soft soap and wishful thinking to begin with and, in the end, despair.  
-CS Lewis in _The Case for Christianity_ */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Tom Brennan
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:54

When I bought my Yamaha piano in 1989, I heard a story that Yamaha had 
been supplying free pianos to universities for years.  It was more than 
them just being nice, they knew that someone practicing every day on the 
school grand piano would likely go on to buy one, or be the decision 
maker for an orchestra, night club, or whatever.  I always thought that 
was super smart of them.  What I always thought was rather dumb, is that 
IBM doesn't do similar with educational use of all their software.  And 
that's just copied bits ... no wood, metal, delivery, tuning, etc.

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

Re: COBOL Question

2020-06-09 Thread David Spiegel


+1 sleazy-freaking-trieve.
(I used to support it, Panvalet and Librarian)

On 2020-06-09 16:27, Joe Monk wrote:

"Easytrieve plus"

You mean sleazytrieve plus? :)

There was also DYL280 and QUIKJOB.

Joe

On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 12:55 PM Mike Schwab  wrote:


4GL - I've used Telon which takes a screen layout and database layout
and generates the cobol code and editing rules.  ADR-Datacom had Ideal
which was similar, later CA.  Easytrieve plus I really liked,
especially the report generation part.

--
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: COBOL Question

2020-06-09 Thread Jackson, Rob

Sleazytrieve is the bane of existence, as much as java is.  We actually dumped 
all CA products, so we have IMU now.  I'm not sure it's any better.  You want 
to see some ugly COBOL?

First Horizon Bank
Mainframe Technical Support


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
John McKown
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:43 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

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

On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 3:28 PM Joe Monk  wrote:

> "Easytrieve plus"
>
> You mean sleazytrieve plus? :)
>

We still use SleavyTrieve+ in production. Crap, we have some RACF reports, 
written over 28 years ago (before my time) which use EZTP to parse the output 
of an "LU *". I really should replace them all with something using
IRRDBU00 output and ICETOOL along the path of RACFICE. But "we're going away" 
(perhaps finally, given UnitedHealthCare has enough money to just force it) and 
so "why bother?".



>
> There was also DYL280 and QUIKJOB.
>
> Joe
>
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 12:55 PM Mike Schwab 
> wrote:
>
> > 4GL - I've used Telon which takes a screen layout and database 
> > layout and generates the cobol code and editing rules.  ADR-Datacom 
> > had Ideal which was similar, later CA.  Easytrieve plus I really 
> > liked, especially the report generation part.
> >
> > 
> > -- 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
>


--
People in sleeping bags are the soft tacos of the bear world.
Maranatha! <><
John McKown

--
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

Re: COBOL Question

On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 3:28 PM Joe Monk  wrote:

> "Easytrieve plus"
>
> You mean sleazytrieve plus? :)
>

We still use SleavyTrieve+ in production. Crap, we have some RACF reports,
written over 28 years ago (before my time) which use EZTP to parse the
output of an "LU *". I really should replace them all with something using
IRRDBU00 output and ICETOOL along the path of RACFICE. But "we're going
away" (perhaps finally, given UnitedHealthCare has enough money to just
force it) and so "why bother?".

>
> There was also DYL280 and QUIKJOB.
>
> Joe
>
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 12:55 PM Mike Schwab 
> wrote:
>
> > 4GL - I've used Telon which takes a screen layout and database layout
> > and generates the cobol code and editing rules.  ADR-Datacom had Ideal
> > which was similar, later CA.  Easytrieve plus I really liked,
> > especially the report generation part.
> >
> > --
> > 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
>

-- 
People in sleeping bags are the soft tacos of the bear world.
Maranatha! <><
John McKown

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

Re: COBOL Question

2020-06-09 Thread John Clifford

I used quikjob for nearly 20 years as a systems pgmr. It was  a very simple
yet powerful product. It also had several other quikxxx modules to handle
vsam easily and a report module to make very neat reports from bland data.
I think the company got bought out and the products renamed at some point
in the early 2000's. I think I fixed over 200 small issues conveyed by
programmers at 2 or 3 in the morning just to get the batch back up and
working again.  Miss those days

John Clifford (had to retire)

On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 4:28 PM Joe Monk  wrote:

> "Easytrieve plus"
>
> You mean sleazytrieve plus? :)
>
> There was also DYL280 and QUIKJOB.
>
> Joe
>
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 12:55 PM Mike Schwab 
> wrote:
>
> > 4GL - I've used Telon which takes a screen layout and database layout
> > and generates the cobol code and editing rules.  ADR-Datacom had Ideal
> > which was similar, later CA.  Easytrieve plus I really liked,
> > especially the report generation part.
> >
> > --
> > 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: COBOL Question

2020-06-09 Thread Steve Beaver

I have not see sleazytrieve on 20 years 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 9, 2020, at 15:27, Joe Monk  wrote:
> 
> "Easytrieve plus"
> 
> You mean sleazytrieve plus? :)
> 
> There was also DYL280 and QUIKJOB.
> 
> Joe
> 
>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 12:55 PM Mike Schwab  wrote:
>> 
>> 4GL - I've used Telon which takes a screen layout and database layout
>> and generates the cobol code and editing rules.  ADR-Datacom had Ideal
>> which was similar, later CA.  Easytrieve plus I really liked,
>> especially the report generation part.
>> 
>> --
>> 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: COBOL Question

2020-06-09 Thread Joe Monk

"Easytrieve plus"

You mean sleazytrieve plus? :)

There was also DYL280 and QUIKJOB.

Joe

On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 12:55 PM Mike Schwab  wrote:

> 4GL - I've used Telon which takes a screen layout and database layout
> and generates the cobol code and editing rules.  ADR-Datacom had Ideal
> which was similar, later CA.  Easytrieve plus I really liked,
> especially the report generation part.
>
> --
> 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: Old Code Gets Younger Every Year - Marianne Bellotti - Medium

Ah, but Knuth's Literate Programming isn't a self documenting language; it's a 
means to integrate the documentation source with the code source and get well 
formatted text out of it. You still need to write the documentation before web 
can format it.


--
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: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:53 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Old Code Gets Younger Every Year - Marianne Bellotti - Medium

On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 15:46:48 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:

>Ultimately it's a management issue common to all languages: if programmers are 
>not required to document and to keep documentation up to date, or, worse, are 
>prohibited from "wasting time" doing so, there will be downstream 
>consequences. In the case of COBOL there is also the pernicious myth that it 
>is self documenting - no language is.
>

https://secure-web.cisco.com/1-JhToiJrx436ImEyAvJ7oCrY0ES7gy9ZRAvC_aqO2TcpRgdX0RqD_OS9Fj9cG8V2HyMYtRitabX4WQK-dZMSpHDv2kUeBb2TPjoG0bo6Sdb-LNNAwWr6fARyTVE0FKb73bTzj_s2lu7xKvf5Bo87hlvM9z-jd3zFbazs6KXnf1qLtZg0qDbX4I5eDpANZUycd_7LGnxzzWrHe2aQZ9dEsQ3EASRvFv13Xs5IaFzIJkn4DmsMI4jU4IlVct6vthxdFUK7JS1Y3RQG2-OAD1pANe7v8i5T8yc7fZY20sNoR-7YnbZoHINpxVM1JqxlINvWwKZTkSCnKGP03GBRJ6q5Cvoj0a88HYeumT1yVOfXBtwpj8kGIhRJaC15IZOG1BVLCYPvfmoLb-ekiEGguymkrIWbq4_6x3HL2WJBdBD2VmUpv8TEPbQiEQNpAS-AYkcZ/https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FWeb_%28programming_system%29

>BTW, is there any shop still using CODASYL COBOL?

-- 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: Old Code Gets Younger Every Year - Marianne Bellotti - Medium

Yes.  Without all the END-??? statements.

On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 5:46 PM Seymour J Metz  wrote:
>
> Wouldn't that be VSCOBOL, well beyond CODASYL?
>
>
> --
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
>
> 
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
> Mike Schwab [mike.a.sch...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:42 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Old Code Gets Younger Every Year - Marianne Bellotti - Medium
>
> Our shop had one agency still running report writer reports using the
> free built in version (78?).
>
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 3:47 PM Seymour J Metz  wrote:
> >
> > Ultimately it's a management issue common to all languages: if programmers 
> > are not required to document and to keep documentation up to date, or, 
> > worse, are prohibited from "wasting time" doing so, there will be 
> > downstream consequences. In the case of COBOL there is also the pernicious 
> > myth that it is self documenting - no language is.
> >
> > BTW, is there any shop still using CODASYL COBOL?
> >
> >
> > --
> > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
> >
> > 
> > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
> > Mark Regan [marktre...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:16 AM
> > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> > Subject: Old Code Gets Younger Every Year - Marianne Bellotti - Medium
> >
> > https://secure-web.cisco.com/1b-5A-k6m87QTuqyzbtnQj11SHVaJXaKjTnUPxpdSFiuZdewfEpzGWXFrNQU429jqXYBeZ4hkAlxT3dwOqilF88CSRyW-_NgSwlWsyj7sRwwUDLDv42jM5to-s_cB2PwkNZOAwdlREnOqHj8Z5NG_geFUVQiQSalS9G2b_-Vv-lOmNzr1w2DoxFhTgpEe1vl5WSMDwwChgYvdh2p8moci0AHnOb23dU-X5x1IgQZDBRRWxQV7SL-iUr-bBmPkjtCWqW5OoUGnpWYfYAgHKjgsIN0yd7RfpAuQstdzLgyxmoxhUXAMW7tz8nsr8yvioxLnon7_S31Bq7HViahTEIhK-n_F46JT4alOq53UrcW0QmMxL-X7nuNlhvhzy61B2WLAnBwT-dikGqH-DzsncM4a7jNKW-_Ok9sJM1Ef0H7sZ3n0XN5RiQm2VQ-pLaCJ3jGR_jCvq8GbbjxaqhnwgjHgAw/https%3A%2F%2Fmedium.com%2F%40bellmar%2Fold-code-gets-younger-every-year-3bd24c7f2262
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Mark T. Regan
> >
> > --
> > 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
>
>
>
> --
> Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA
> Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all?
>
> --
> 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



-- 
Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA
Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all?

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

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

Apple Did the high school thing.  That's where they got their devotees.

On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 3:54 PM Tom Brennan  wrote:
>
> When I bought my Yamaha piano in 1989, I heard a story that Yamaha had
> been supplying free pianos to universities for years.  It was more than
> them just being nice, they knew that someone practicing every day on the
> school grand piano would likely go on to buy one, or be the decision
> maker for an orchestra, night club, or whatever.  I always thought that
> was super smart of them.  What I always thought was rather dumb, is that
> IBM doesn't do similar with educational use of all their software.  And
> that's just copied bits ... no wood, metal, delivery, tuning, etc.
>
> On 6/9/2020 5:02 AM, Bob Bridges wrote:
> > A coworker just sent me this brief article.
> >
> > https://www.techrepublic.com/article/everyone-wants-to-retire-mainframes-but-74-of-modernization-efforts-fail/
> >
> > I'm interested in two aspects of this:
> >
> > 1) The writer uses the word "modernization" quite a bit, and as far as I 
> > can tell she uses it, without explanation, to mean "switching from 
> > mainframes to more recently invented platforms".  This is the old 
> > assumption we've talked about recently.
> >
> > 2) There's a really surprising number in there:
> >
> > "...almost 100% of survey respondents plan to move legacy applications to 
> > the cloud this year and the motivation to move is clear:
> >
> > - 60% strongly agree they will be left behind competitively if they fail to 
> > modernize
> > - 33% say modernizing has allowed the company to be more reactive to market 
> > changes
> > - 34% say legacy modernization has accelerated digital transformation 
> > projects
> >
> > About three-quarters of leaders said they have started a modernization 
> > program but failed to complete it"
> >
> > Can that "almost 100%" claim be true?  I confess that three out of my last 
> > three clients are talking about eliminating the mainframe, but I supposed 
> > it to be an anomaly.  Maybe the survey used the word "modernize" and the 
> > author ~assumed~ this must mean dropping the mainframe.
> >
> > The article also says "Mainframes are still critical to business operations 
> > with 71% of the Fortune 500 depending on these machines, including 92 of 
> > the world's 100 largest banks".  Come on - she's telling us that almost 
> > ~all~ of those companies intend to switch legacy applications to the cloud? 
> >  I just can't buy that.  ~My~ bank had certainly better not be planning 
> > such a move.
> >
> > ---
> > Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313
> >
> > /* If a problem has a single neck, it has a simple solution. */
> >
> > --
> > 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



-- 
Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA
Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all?

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

Re: AZD messages?

2020-06-09 Thread Michael Babcock


Sean,

Good News!  I successfully started a zCX instance and logged on via OMVS 
and used the ssh command to reach the zCX instance.  I also successfully 
logged on via a Bluezone VT320 session pointing to our DVIPA address.  I 
had to transfer the admin IDs private key to my PC, convert it to ppk 
format (using Puttygen) and import that in Bluezone’s session.   Woohoo!


For the “Retrieve Workflow Version” step (3.2) Here’s the request tab 
(I’ve obscured certain details, like https://mysystem.mycompany, etc).


HTTP method:
GET
Request:
https://mysystem.mycompany:43200/zosmf/workflow/rest/1.0/workflows/d17d4bf9-4467-41b7-8e6c-ec8d47c40997

And this is what I get in the Response tab.  Also don’t forget, in the 
Status tab, the expected return code is 200, my actual return is 200.



{
   "access": "Public",
   "accountInfo": null,
   "automationStatus": null,
   "category": "provisioning",
   "containsParallelSteps": false,
   "deleteCompletedJobs": false,
   "globalVariableGroup": null,
   "isCallable": null,
   "jobStatement": null,
   "owner": "",
   "percentComplete": 9,
   "productID": "HZDC7C0",
   "productName": "IBM z\/OS Container Extensions",
   "productVersion": "V2R4.1.0",
   "scope": "none",
   "softwareType": "IBM-zCX",
   "statusName": "in-progress",
   "system": "mySplex.mySystem",
   "vendor": "IBM",
   "workflowDefinitionFileMD5Value": "11b08002b4648a0778c35c76dcbe9f64",
   "workflowDescription": "Provision a IBM zOS Container Extensions 
Appliance Instance.",

   "workflowID": "zOS_Container_Extensions_Provision",
   "workflowKey": "d17d4bf9-4467-41b7-8e6c-ec8d47c40997",
   "workflowName": "Provision a IBM zOS Container Extensions Appliance 
Instance. - Workflow",

   "workflowVersion": "1.0.18"
}

On 6/8/2020 7:16 AM, Sean Gleann wrote:

Thanks for the hint about thoroughly checking output, Michael.
I went back and studied all the saved outputs, hoping to find something
that might be helpful.
In the event, there were no indications of such problems - no error
messages or non-zero return codes - but it's as well to be sure.

Can I ask you for more information regarding what you see with the '3.2
Retrieve Workflow version' step, please?
For me, I get to the point of clicking 'Perform' on this step, and I see
that z/OSMF is about to use the REST API with the request

https://localhost:10443/zosmf/workflow/rest/1.0/workflows/3ca56936-9a81-48a0-94d9-84e28ee2d842
:

Clicking 'Next' on this results in:

IZUWFE: The request cannot be completed because an error occurred. The
following error data is returned: "EDC8128I Connection refused.
(errno2=0x76630291) (Connection refused)"

and so I am forced to click on 'Finish' if I am to proceed.
What do you see during this sequence?

I suspect that it's the 'localhost:10443' bit that is the root of the
problem, but I'm unsure how to circumvent it, or even to correct the
problem.
As I said earlier in this thread, I'm working through a tunnelled SSH
connection to access my z/OSMF. In the main, this is working quite happily.
That connection definition associates my desktop system's local port 10443
with the hosts systems' 10443, and the URL I use to access z/OSMF is
https://localhost:10443/zosmf.
So I'm at a bit of a loss in understanding why the connection should be
refused.

Regards
Sean


On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 at 04:08, Michael Babcock  wrote:


Oh and beware, just because the Verify Feature Bits job (and a couple of
others) gets a zero condition code doesn’t mean it executed successfully.
You have to check STDERR and STDOUT tabs.  Mine always gets a syntax
error.

On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 10:05 AM Sean Gleann  wrote:


It's been really quite a troublesome effort for me, Michael, but I guess
it's true to say that most of the problems are down to my rudimentary
knowledge of TCPIP and networking in general.
For various reasons, I have to use a tunnelled connection through to the
z/OS guest, and that makes things a bit more interesting.
The 'Getting Started' redbook (SG24-8457-00) has been my sole point of
reference all the way through, and yeah, it's OK - up to point. it

doesn't

cover the tunnelling complication, naturally, and there are some very

poor

typos to take into account.
As for the Workload Provisioning process in z/OSMF - after you've

specified

a bunch of parameters, it's just a JCL generator/job submitter/checker

with

a couple of z/OSMF-specific bits thrown in.
During the initial parameter specification phase I had considerable
difficulty at the point of specifying the RSA key, but eventually got it
right.
Step 3.2 in the process - where some sort of version information is

looked

for - has always failed for me. I've never been able to make it work as
expected and have had to force it to a 'complete' state by clicking the
'Finish' button.

I tried to adapt the process detailed in the redbook to suit our security
set-up, but the result never worked. In the end, I followed the procedure
to the letter, and created the ZCXxxx users

Re: COBOL Question

4GL - I've used Telon which takes a screen layout and database layout
and generates the cobol code and editing rules.  ADR-Datacom had Ideal
which was similar, later CA.  Easytrieve plus I really liked,
especially the report generation part.

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

Re: Old Code Gets Younger Every Year - Marianne Bellotti - Medium

Wouldn't that be VSCOBOL, well beyond CODASYL?


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


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Mike Schwab [mike.a.sch...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:42 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Old Code Gets Younger Every Year - Marianne Bellotti - Medium

Our shop had one agency still running report writer reports using the
free built in version (78?).

On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 3:47 PM Seymour J Metz  wrote:
>
> Ultimately it's a management issue common to all languages: if programmers 
> are not required to document and to keep documentation up to date, or, worse, 
> are prohibited from "wasting time" doing so, there will be downstream 
> consequences. In the case of COBOL there is also the pernicious myth that it 
> is self documenting - no language is.
>
> BTW, is there any shop still using CODASYL COBOL?
>
>
> --
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
>
> 
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
> Mark Regan [marktre...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:16 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Old Code Gets Younger Every Year - Marianne Bellotti - Medium
>
> https://secure-web.cisco.com/1b-5A-k6m87QTuqyzbtnQj11SHVaJXaKjTnUPxpdSFiuZdewfEpzGWXFrNQU429jqXYBeZ4hkAlxT3dwOqilF88CSRyW-_NgSwlWsyj7sRwwUDLDv42jM5to-s_cB2PwkNZOAwdlREnOqHj8Z5NG_geFUVQiQSalS9G2b_-Vv-lOmNzr1w2DoxFhTgpEe1vl5WSMDwwChgYvdh2p8moci0AHnOb23dU-X5x1IgQZDBRRWxQV7SL-iUr-bBmPkjtCWqW5OoUGnpWYfYAgHKjgsIN0yd7RfpAuQstdzLgyxmoxhUXAMW7tz8nsr8yvioxLnon7_S31Bq7HViahTEIhK-n_F46JT4alOq53UrcW0QmMxL-X7nuNlhvhzy61B2WLAnBwT-dikGqH-DzsncM4a7jNKW-_Ok9sJM1Ef0H7sZ3n0XN5RiQm2VQ-pLaCJ3jGR_jCvq8GbbjxaqhnwgjHgAw/https%3A%2F%2Fmedium.com%2F%40bellmar%2Fold-code-gets-younger-every-year-3bd24c7f2262
>
> Regards,
>
> Mark T. Regan
>
> --
> 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



--
Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA
Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all?

--
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: Old Code Gets Younger Every Year - Marianne Bellotti - Medium

Our shop had one agency still running report writer reports using the
free built in version (78?).

On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 3:47 PM Seymour J Metz  wrote:
>
> Ultimately it's a management issue common to all languages: if programmers 
> are not required to document and to keep documentation up to date, or, worse, 
> are prohibited from "wasting time" doing so, there will be downstream 
> consequences. In the case of COBOL there is also the pernicious myth that it 
> is self documenting - no language is.
>
> BTW, is there any shop still using CODASYL COBOL?
>
>
> --
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
>
> 
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
> Mark Regan [marktre...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:16 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Old Code Gets Younger Every Year - Marianne Bellotti - Medium
>
> https://secure-web.cisco.com/1b-5A-k6m87QTuqyzbtnQj11SHVaJXaKjTnUPxpdSFiuZdewfEpzGWXFrNQU429jqXYBeZ4hkAlxT3dwOqilF88CSRyW-_NgSwlWsyj7sRwwUDLDv42jM5to-s_cB2PwkNZOAwdlREnOqHj8Z5NG_geFUVQiQSalS9G2b_-Vv-lOmNzr1w2DoxFhTgpEe1vl5WSMDwwChgYvdh2p8moci0AHnOb23dU-X5x1IgQZDBRRWxQV7SL-iUr-bBmPkjtCWqW5OoUGnpWYfYAgHKjgsIN0yd7RfpAuQstdzLgyxmoxhUXAMW7tz8nsr8yvioxLnon7_S31Bq7HViahTEIhK-n_F46JT4alOq53UrcW0QmMxL-X7nuNlhvhzy61B2WLAnBwT-dikGqH-DzsncM4a7jNKW-_Ok9sJM1Ef0H7sZ3n0XN5RiQm2VQ-pLaCJ3jGR_jCvq8GbbjxaqhnwgjHgAw/https%3A%2F%2Fmedium.com%2F%40bellmar%2Fold-code-gets-younger-every-year-3bd24c7f2262
>
> Regards,
>
> Mark T. Regan
>
> --
> 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



-- 
Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA
Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all?

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

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

Probably a combination of legal issues and lack of vision. Didn't the consent 
decree kill the 80% discount?


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


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Tom 
Brennan [t...@tombrennansoftware.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:54 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

When I bought my Yamaha piano in 1989, I heard a story that Yamaha had
been supplying free pianos to universities for years.  It was more than
them just being nice, they knew that someone practicing every day on the
school grand piano would likely go on to buy one, or be the decision
maker for an orchestra, night club, or whatever.  I always thought that
was super smart of them.  What I always thought was rather dumb, is that
IBM doesn't do similar with educational use of all their software.  And
that's just copied bits ... no wood, metal, delivery, tuning, etc.

On 6/9/2020 5:02 AM, Bob Bridges wrote:
> A coworker just sent me this brief article.
>
> https://secure-web.cisco.com/1h8_Z1HJHyWR1DS49jM-fQ5QyC79B4AjQ5BJAf2QNfWMe6S3QU5rquqDgOE7nbyVmlJOtpB29Od29EHvWRGu0oEaJeM54xC24QLMdQqxASXpXu3z7T6o8Wkw7U1s-WuyDkka_vYd3P4kLQJbPc0aO0RVrTEMg3eMLhMPLlwLbd1pYgapP45w3yusjNB_mTTALGW1I1S9C1E1FuKVX94TL8i6WJN_g28L_Us1Slg3oPqA__zxdzx6qo3K8zfRXhtw9i3EeL22VLdlFiMMhopyxBW4w3PQ3H3GvVFwHduh4SVhvng0XPXP5Fgy3XUueIy9eH0D3BVpAN7yHlLa1kHdEokIUN6gEN4CNVhKswKjwD3xO9gc0OosCbs3CoAM6TNm7EiPQwapZy5FIyKlh58OAsQm_62cVKJm2UA78hL-1jK4hrbwdt-54F8rv2GujDrZ4/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.techrepublic.com%2Farticle%2Feveryone-wants-to-retire-mainframes-but-74-of-modernization-efforts-fail%2F
>
> I'm interested in two aspects of this:
>
> 1) The writer uses the word "modernization" quite a bit, and as far as I can 
> tell she uses it, without explanation, to mean "switching from mainframes to 
> more recently invented platforms".  This is the old assumption we've talked 
> about recently.
>
> 2) There's a really surprising number in there:
>
> "...almost 100% of survey respondents plan to move legacy applications to the 
> cloud this year and the motivation to move is clear:
>
> - 60% strongly agree they will be left behind competitively if they fail to 
> modernize
> - 33% say modernizing has allowed the company to be more reactive to market 
> changes
> - 34% say legacy modernization has accelerated digital transformation projects
>
> About three-quarters of leaders said they have started a modernization 
> program but failed to complete it"
>
> Can that "almost 100%" claim be true?  I confess that three out of my last 
> three clients are talking about eliminating the mainframe, but I supposed it 
> to be an anomaly.  Maybe the survey used the word "modernize" and the author 
> ~assumed~ this must mean dropping the mainframe.
>
> The article also says "Mainframes are still critical to business operations 
> with 71% of the Fortune 500 depending on these machines, including 92 of the 
> world's 100 largest banks".  Come on - she's telling us that almost ~all~ of 
> those companies intend to switch legacy applications to the cloud?  I just 
> can't buy that.  ~My~ bank had certainly better not be planning such a move.
>
> ---
> Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313
>
> /* If a problem has a single neck, it has a simple solution. */
>
> --
> 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: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread Paul Gilmartin

On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 17:23:48 +, Doug wrote:

>And maybe the third dumb thing they did was give DOS to Gates and trash 
>OS/2
>
And way before that, not making PL/S a product.  It left a void that's
belatedly being filled by Metal C.

>-- Original Message --
>From: "Farley, Peter x23353"
>Sent: 09-Jun-20 12:25:16
>
>>The first really dumb thing that IBM did was to STOP providing heavily 
>>discounted mainframe hardware and software to universities and colleges.  The 
>>NYC public colleges (CUNY, City University of New York) used to offer courses 
>>in COBOL and VSAM and many other mainframe technologies in the 1970's and 
>>into the 1980's, as did prestigious universities like NYU, but by the time my 
>>son attended CUNY post-2000 there were none of these courses available any 
>>more.  Everything in the CS area was x86 hardware and Linux OS based.
>>
>>The second really dumb thing that IBM did was to stop caring and feeding 
>>smaller commercial businesses running various combinations of DOS / VSE / VM 
>>software on (then) less-expensive hardware, at least in the US.  I think 
>>Europe still has a thriving or at least surviving VM/VSE community.  
>>Successful small businesses, while less profitable in the present can easily 
>>over time become larger businesses needing the IBM flagship OS and 
>>corresponding hardware.  No small ecosystem growing into a larger ecosystem 
>>means the potentially profitable pipeline dries up.
>>
>>Just my personal opinions of course.
>>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: Tom Brennan
>>Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:54 AM
>>
>>When I bought my Yamaha piano in 1989, I heard a story that Yamaha had been 
>>supplying free pianos to universities for years.  It was more than them just 
>>being nice, they knew that someone practicing every day on the school grand 
>>piano would likely go on to buy one, or be the decision maker for an 
>>orchestra, night club, or whatever.  I always thought that was super smart of 
>>them.  What I always thought was rather dumb, is that IBM doesn't do similar 
>>with educational use of all their software.  And that's just copied bits ... 
>>no wood, metal, delivery, tuning, etc.
>>
Was the (1959?) Consent Decree an obstacle to that?  Did IBM partly
persist under the umbrella of R partnerships?

>>On 6/9/2020 5:02 AM, Bob Bridges wrote:
>>>  A coworker just sent me this brief article.
>>>
>>>  
>>> https://www.techrepublic.com/article/everyone-wants-to-retire-mainframes-but-74-of-modernization-efforts-fail/

-- gil

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

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread Doug

And maybe the third dumb thing they did was give DOS to Gates and trash 
OS/2

Doug Fuerst
d...@bkassociates.net

-- Original Message --
From: "Farley, Peter x23353" 
To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu
Sent: 09-Jun-20 12:25:16
Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

The first really dumb thing that IBM did was to STOP providing heavily 
discounted mainframe hardware and software to universities and colleges.  The 
NYC public colleges (CUNY, City University of New York) used to offer courses 
in COBOL and VSAM and many other mainframe technologies in the 1970's and into 
the 1980's, as did prestigious universities like NYU, but by the time my son 
attended CUNY post-2000 there were none of these courses available any more.  
Everything in the CS area was x86 hardware and Linux OS based.

The second really dumb thing that IBM did was to stop caring and feeding 
smaller commercial businesses running various combinations of DOS / VSE / VM 
software on (then) less-expensive hardware, at least in the US.  I think Europe 
still has a thriving or at least surviving VM/VSE community.  Successful small 
businesses, while less profitable in the present can easily over time become 
larger businesses needing the IBM flagship OS and corresponding hardware.  No 
small ecosystem growing into a larger ecosystem means the potentially 
profitable pipeline dries up.

Just my personal opinions of course.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Tom 
Brennan
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:54 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

When I bought my Yamaha piano in 1989, I heard a story that Yamaha had been 
supplying free pianos to universities for years.  It was more than them just 
being nice, they knew that someone practicing every day on the school grand 
piano would likely go on to buy one, or be the decision maker for an orchestra, 
night club, or whatever.  I always thought that was super smart of them.  What 
I always thought was rather dumb, is that IBM doesn't do similar with 
educational use of all their software.  And that's just copied bits ... no 
wood, metal, delivery, tuning, etc.

On 6/9/2020 5:02 AM, Bob Bridges wrote:

 A coworker just sent me this brief article.

 https://www.techrepublic.com/article/everyone-wants-to-retire-mainfram
 es-but-74-of-modernization-efforts-fail/

 I'm interested in two aspects of this:

 1) The writer uses the word "modernization" quite a bit, and as far as I can tell she 
uses it, without explanation, to mean "switching from mainframes to more recently invented 
platforms".  This is the old assumption we've talked about recently.

 2) There's a really surprising number in there:

 "...almost 100% of survey respondents plan to move legacy applications to the 
cloud this year and the motivation to move is clear:

 - 60% strongly agree they will be left behind competitively if they
 fail to modernize
 - 33% say modernizing has allowed the company to be more reactive to
 market changes
 - 34% say legacy modernization has accelerated digital transformation
 projects

 About three-quarters of leaders said they have started a modernization program but 
failed to complete it"

 Can that "almost 100%" claim be true?  I confess that three out of my last three clients 
are talking about eliminating the mainframe, but I supposed it to be an anomaly.  Maybe the survey 
used the word "modernize" and the author ~assumed~ this must mean dropping the mainframe.

 The article also says "Mainframes are still critical to business operations with 
71% of the Fortune 500 depending on these machines, including 92 of the world's 100 
largest banks".  Come on - she's telling us that almost ~all~ of those companies 
intend to switch legacy applications to the cloud?  I just can't buy that.  ~My~ bank had 
certainly better not be planning such a move.

---

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: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

True, but not entirely satisfactorily.  Many of the "newer" (FSVO "new") 
complex instructions have yet to be added to any of the Hercules emulator 
systems, so "full" emulation as available in zPDT isn't truly available (yet, 
until/unless more people contribute and make it so).

IMHO IBM could easily make the zPDT system with its developer-level CPU / I/O 
governors to prevent "production" level performance at a realistic hobbyist 
cost level.  But it seems as if zPDT is just another profit opportunity in 
their minds, rather than a community-builder.  In the long run, 
community-building will wind up far more profitable, but that view seems not to 
have penetrated the IBM decision-makers' minds.

What would really blow my mind would be regularly released copies of the 
(in?)famous "Redbook" copy of PoOPS with all the micro- and milli-code 
documentation which could provide a way to (perhaps) quickly be able to emulate 
many of the "new" more complex instructions with micro- and milli-code 
emulation in addition to software emulation of the silicon-implemented 
instructions.

*Never* going to happen of course, because then (heaven forfend!) there could 
well be a re-incarnation of the "clone wars", but one can dream.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
John McKown
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:50 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 11:38 AM Farley, Peter x23353 < 
peter.far...@broadridge.com> wrote:

> John,
>
> It isn't just the $900 per year for the ADCD OS license.  You can’t 
> legally get ADCD without the ~$5K yearly cost of the zPDT dongle and 
> Linux hardware emulation layer to run the OS's.  That's the real kicker.
>
> OTOH I wouldn't be surprised if bad-actor state security organizations 
> (or US security skunkworks organizations for that matter) haven't 
> already reverse-engineered the zPDT dongle for their own nefarious uses.
> Paranoid?  Maybe, maybe not.
>

I have read "elsewhere" that some people got at least some earlier versions of 
z/OS to run on a PC using Hercules/390. So the "bad actor" states likely can 
run z/OS.

>
> Peter
--

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: COBOL Question

The inner product of two vectors is a sum of products. The inner product of two 
square matrices has a sum of products for each element:

 a=0;
 do i=lbound(a) to hbound(a);
do k=lbound(a,2) to hbound(a,2);
   a(i,k) = sum(b(i,*)*c(*,k));
   end;
end;

The trace of a square matrix is the sum of the diagonal elements:

 trace = 0;
 do i=lbound(a) to hbound(a);
trace = trace + a(i,i);
end;


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


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Frank Swarbrick [frank.swarbr...@outlook.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:02 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

I don't know what any of those terms even mean, so I'll not attempt to answer.
My interest in learning Fortran is more for it syntax than for its scientific 
and mathematical capabilities.


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
Seymour J Metz 
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:19 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

Partially. Does Fortran now have reduction operators, e.g., inner product, 
trace?


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


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Frank Swarbrick [frank.swarbr...@outlook.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:42 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

Do you mean like this?

integer, dimension(10) :: a, b, c
a = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10]
b = [2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11]
c = a + b
print *, "a = ", a
print *, "b = ", b
print *, "c = ", c

a =1   2   3   4   5   6
   7   8   9  10
b =2   3   4   5   6   7
   8   9  10  11
c =3   5   7   9  11  13
  15  17  19  21

Apparently added as part of the Fortran 90 standard.


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
Seymour J Metz 
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:16 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

Have they added array operations to Fortran?


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


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Bob 
Bridges [robhbrid...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:35 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

I haven't written anything in FORTRAN since some time in the late '70s.  But
even much more recently I heard it's regarded by number crunchers, engineers
say, as the best language for sheer speed.  Not so great for report writing
and formatting.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* If a problem has a single neck, it has a simple solution. */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Frank Swarbrick
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 21:22

I've been teaching myself (modern) Fortran the last few weeks.  Just
because.  It has an interesting behavior that I kind of like.

Normal IF statement:

if (something) then
   
   
end if

But it also has a "one line IF" (not sure offhand of the Fortran "name" for
this):

if (something) 

 must be on the same line as the if and the condition
(unless you specify the "line continuation character"), and of course only
one statement is allowed.  Kind of like the C/Java if statement with out a
statement block, but less dangerous because of the "on the same line"
requirement.  Here is one way I've used it in practice.

call get_command_argument(1, host)
if (inet_addr(host) .lt. 0) call error_stop("Host must be in dotted decimal
format.")
call get_command_argument(2, port_str)
read (port_str, '(i5)', iostat = iostat) port ! convert string 'port_str' to
integer 'port'
if (iostat .ne. 0 .or. port .le. 0) call error_stop("Port must be positive
numeric (0-32767).")

Using "if/then" instead of just "if" I'd have had this:

call get_command_argument(1, host)
if (inet_addr(host) .lt. 0) then
call error_stop("Host must be in dotted decimal format.")
end if
call get_command_argument(2, port_str)
read (port_str, '(i5)', iostat = iostat) port ! convert string 'port_str' to
integer 'port'
if (iostat .ne. 0 .or. port .le. 0) then
call error_stop("Port must be positive numeric (0-32767).")
end if

Given by absolute druthers I would have the then clause part of the single
line if instead of the if/end if, but its still pretty nice regardless, as
it doesn't cause as much "clutter" as error handling often does.

On a side note, I think Fortran has done a much better job than COBOL of
adding "modern" features (starting with

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 11:38 AM Farley, Peter x23353 <
peter.far...@broadridge.com> wrote:

> John,
>
> It isn't just the $900 per year for the ADCD OS license.  You can’t
> legally get ADCD without the ~$5K yearly cost of the zPDT dongle and Linux
> hardware emulation layer to run the OS's.  That's the real kicker.
>
> OTOH I wouldn't be surprised if bad-actor state security organizations (or
> US security skunkworks organizations for that matter) haven't already
> reverse-engineered the zPDT dongle for their own nefarious uses.
> Paranoid?  Maybe, maybe not.
>

I have read "elsewhere" that some people got at least some earlier versions
of z/OS to run on a PC using Hercules/390. So the "bad actor" states likely
can run z/OS.



>
> Peter
>
>
>
-- 
People in sleeping bags are the soft tacos of the bear world.
Maranatha! <><
John McKown

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

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 11:28 AM PINION, RICHARD W. 
wrote:

> That's just the price of the current ADCD offering.  To license
> zPDT itself is roughly $4,000/emulated CPU.
>

In the words of Emily Latilla: "Never mind."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjYoNL4g5Vg



>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf
> Of John McKown
> Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:24 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"
>
> [External Email. Exercise caution when clicking links or opening
> attachments.]
>
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 10:54 AM Tom Brennan 
> wrote:
>
> > When I bought my Yamaha piano in 1989, I heard a story that Yamaha had
> > been supplying free pianos to universities for years.  It was more
> > than them just being nice, they knew that someone practicing every day
> > on the school grand piano would likely go on to buy one, or be the
> > decision maker for an orchestra, night club, or whatever.  I always
> > thought that was super smart of them.  What I always thought was
> > rather dumb, is that IBM doesn't do similar with educational use of
> > all their software.  And that's just copied bits ... no wood, metal,
> delivery, tuning, etc.
> >
> >
> I want an _affordable_ version of zPDT for _myself_ as a _hobbiest_. The
> current zPDT seems to be for "home workers" of an ISV or maybe office
> workers for a 2-3 person operation (IDK). I just looked and it is $900/yr
> U.S. . I can afford that. But I'm not an ISV. And I don't want to "bother"
> with whatever it takes to convince IBM that I am an ISV. Mainly because
> I'd be lying through my teeth. And I'm not a scum politician, so I'm
> adverse to doing that. {yeah, I'm being tacky}
>
>
> --
> People in sleeping bags are the soft tacos of the bear world.
> Maranatha! <><
> John McKown
>
> --
> 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
>


-- 
People in sleeping bags are the soft tacos of the bear world.
Maranatha! <><
John McKown

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

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

John,

It isn't just the $900 per year for the ADCD OS license.  You can’t legally get 
ADCD without the ~$5K yearly cost of the zPDT dongle and Linux hardware 
emulation layer to run the OS's.  That's the real kicker.

OTOH I wouldn't be surprised if bad-actor state security organizations (or US 
security skunkworks organizations for that matter) haven't already 
reverse-engineered the zPDT dongle for their own nefarious uses.  Paranoid?  
Maybe, maybe not.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
John McKown
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:24 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 10:54 AM Tom Brennan 
wrote:

> When I bought my Yamaha piano in 1989, I heard a story that Yamaha had 
> been supplying free pianos to universities for years.  It was more 
> than them just being nice, they knew that someone practicing every day 
> on the school grand piano would likely go on to buy one, or be the 
> decision maker for an orchestra, night club, or whatever.  I always 
> thought that was super smart of them.  What I always thought was 
> rather dumb, is that IBM doesn't do similar with educational use of 
> all their software.  And that's just copied bits ... no wood, metal, 
> delivery, tuning, etc.
>
>
I want an _affordable_ version of zPDT for _myself_ as a _hobbiest_. The 
current zPDT seems to be for "home workers" of an ISV or maybe office workers 
for a 2-3 person operation (IDK). I just looked and it is $900/yr U.S. . I can 
afford that. But I'm not an ISV. And I don't want to "bother"
with whatever it takes to convince IBM that I am an ISV. Mainly because I'd be 
lying through my teeth. And I'm not a scum politician, so I'm adverse to doing 
that. {yeah, I'm being tacky}

--

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: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread PINION, RICHARD W.

That's just the price of the current ADCD offering.  To license
zPDT itself is roughly $4,000/emulated CPU.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
John McKown
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:24 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

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

On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 10:54 AM Tom Brennan 
wrote:

> When I bought my Yamaha piano in 1989, I heard a story that Yamaha had 
> been supplying free pianos to universities for years.  It was more 
> than them just being nice, they knew that someone practicing every day 
> on the school grand piano would likely go on to buy one, or be the 
> decision maker for an orchestra, night club, or whatever.  I always 
> thought that was super smart of them.  What I always thought was 
> rather dumb, is that IBM doesn't do similar with educational use of 
> all their software.  And that's just copied bits ... no wood, metal, 
> delivery, tuning, etc.
>
>
I want an _affordable_ version of zPDT for _myself_ as a _hobbiest_. The 
current zPDT seems to be for "home workers" of an ISV or maybe office workers 
for a 2-3 person operation (IDK). I just looked and it is $900/yr U.S. . I can 
afford that. But I'm not an ISV. And I don't want to "bother"
with whatever it takes to convince IBM that I am an ISV. Mainly because I'd be 
lying through my teeth. And I'm not a scum politician, so I'm adverse to doing 
that. {yeah, I'm being tacky}


--
People in sleeping bags are the soft tacos of the bear world.
Maranatha! <><
John McKown

--
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

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

The first really dumb thing that IBM did was to STOP providing heavily 
discounted mainframe hardware and software to universities and colleges.  The 
NYC public colleges (CUNY, City University of New York) used to offer courses 
in COBOL and VSAM and many other mainframe technologies in the 1970's and into 
the 1980's, as did prestigious universities like NYU, but by the time my son 
attended CUNY post-2000 there were none of these courses available any more.  
Everything in the CS area was x86 hardware and Linux OS based.

The second really dumb thing that IBM did was to stop caring and feeding 
smaller commercial businesses running various combinations of DOS / VSE / VM 
software on (then) less-expensive hardware, at least in the US.  I think Europe 
still has a thriving or at least surviving VM/VSE community.  Successful small 
businesses, while less profitable in the present can easily over time become 
larger businesses needing the IBM flagship OS and corresponding hardware.  No 
small ecosystem growing into a larger ecosystem means the potentially 
profitable pipeline dries up.

Just my personal opinions of course.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Tom 
Brennan
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:54 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

When I bought my Yamaha piano in 1989, I heard a story that Yamaha had been 
supplying free pianos to universities for years.  It was more than them just 
being nice, they knew that someone practicing every day on the school grand 
piano would likely go on to buy one, or be the decision maker for an orchestra, 
night club, or whatever.  I always thought that was super smart of them.  What 
I always thought was rather dumb, is that IBM doesn't do similar with 
educational use of all their software.  And that's just copied bits ... no 
wood, metal, delivery, tuning, etc.

On 6/9/2020 5:02 AM, Bob Bridges wrote:
> A coworker just sent me this brief article.
> 
> https://www.techrepublic.com/article/everyone-wants-to-retire-mainfram
> es-but-74-of-modernization-efforts-fail/
> 
> I'm interested in two aspects of this:
> 
> 1) The writer uses the word "modernization" quite a bit, and as far as I can 
> tell she uses it, without explanation, to mean "switching from mainframes to 
> more recently invented platforms".  This is the old assumption we've talked 
> about recently.
> 
> 2) There's a really surprising number in there:
> 
> "...almost 100% of survey respondents plan to move legacy applications to the 
> cloud this year and the motivation to move is clear:
> 
> - 60% strongly agree they will be left behind competitively if they 
> fail to modernize
> - 33% say modernizing has allowed the company to be more reactive to 
> market changes
> - 34% say legacy modernization has accelerated digital transformation 
> projects
> 
> About three-quarters of leaders said they have started a modernization 
> program but failed to complete it"
> 
> Can that "almost 100%" claim be true?  I confess that three out of my last 
> three clients are talking about eliminating the mainframe, but I supposed it 
> to be an anomaly.  Maybe the survey used the word "modernize" and the author 
> ~assumed~ this must mean dropping the mainframe.
> 
> The article also says "Mainframes are still critical to business operations 
> with 71% of the Fortune 500 depending on these machines, including 92 of the 
> world's 100 largest banks".  Come on - she's telling us that almost ~all~ of 
> those companies intend to switch legacy applications to the cloud?  I just 
> can't buy that.  ~My~ bank had certainly better not be planning such a move.
> 
---

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: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 10:54 AM Tom Brennan 
wrote:

> When I bought my Yamaha piano in 1989, I heard a story that Yamaha had
> been supplying free pianos to universities for years.  It was more than
> them just being nice, they knew that someone practicing every day on the
> school grand piano would likely go on to buy one, or be the decision
> maker for an orchestra, night club, or whatever.  I always thought that
> was super smart of them.  What I always thought was rather dumb, is that
> IBM doesn't do similar with educational use of all their software.  And
> that's just copied bits ... no wood, metal, delivery, tuning, etc.
>
>
I want an _affordable_ version of zPDT for _myself_ as a _hobbiest_. The
current zPDT seems to be for "home workers" of an ISV or maybe office
workers for a 2-3 person operation (IDK). I just looked and it is $900/yr
U.S. . I can afford that. But I'm not an ISV. And I don't want to "bother"
with whatever it takes to convince IBM that I am an ISV. Mainly because I'd
be lying through my teeth. And I'm not a scum politician, so I'm adverse to
doing that. {yeah, I'm being tacky}


-- 
People in sleeping bags are the soft tacos of the bear world.
Maranatha! <><
John McKown

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

Re: [External] Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread Pommier, Rex

Years ago, IBM did sell hardware/software to universities at deeply discounted 
prices to attract young people to them.  Why they stopped is anybody's guess.

Rex

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Tom 
Brennan
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:54 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [External] Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

When I bought my Yamaha piano in 1989, I heard a story that Yamaha had been 
supplying free pianos to universities for years.  It was more than them just 
being nice, they knew that someone practicing every day on the school grand 
piano would likely go on to buy one, or be the decision maker for an orchestra, 
night club, or whatever.  I always thought that was super smart of them.  What 
I always thought was rather dumb, is that IBM doesn't do similar with 
educational use of all their software.  And that's just copied bits ... no 
wood, metal, delivery, tuning, etc.

On 6/9/2020 5:02 AM, Bob Bridges wrote:
> A coworker just sent me this brief article.
> 
> https://www.techrepublic.com/article/everyone-wants-to-retire-mainfram
> es-but-74-of-modernization-efforts-fail/
> 
> I'm interested in two aspects of this:
> 
> 1) The writer uses the word "modernization" quite a bit, and as far as I can 
> tell she uses it, without explanation, to mean "switching from mainframes to 
> more recently invented platforms".  This is the old assumption we've talked 
> about recently.
> 
> 2) There's a really surprising number in there:
> 
> "...almost 100% of survey respondents plan to move legacy applications to the 
> cloud this year and the motivation to move is clear:
> 
> - 60% strongly agree they will be left behind competitively if they 
> fail to modernize
> - 33% say modernizing has allowed the company to be more reactive to 
> market changes
> - 34% say legacy modernization has accelerated digital transformation 
> projects
> 
> About three-quarters of leaders said they have started a modernization 
> program but failed to complete it"
> 
> Can that "almost 100%" claim be true?  I confess that three out of my last 
> three clients are talking about eliminating the mainframe, but I supposed it 
> to be an anomaly.  Maybe the survey used the word "modernize" and the author 
> ~assumed~ this must mean dropping the mainframe.
> 
> The article also says "Mainframes are still critical to business operations 
> with 71% of the Fortune 500 depending on these machines, including 92 of the 
> world's 100 largest banks".  Come on - she's telling us that almost ~all~ of 
> those companies intend to switch legacy applications to the cloud?  I just 
> can't buy that.  ~My~ bank had certainly better not be planning such a move.
> 
> ---
> Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313
> 
> /* If a problem has a single neck, it has a simple solution. */
> 
> --
> 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

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

Re: COBOL Question

I don't know what any of those terms even mean, so I'll not attempt to answer.
My interest in learning Fortran is more for it syntax than for its scientific 
and mathematical capabilities.

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
Seymour J Metz 
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:19 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

Partially. Does Fortran now have reduction operators, e.g., inner product, 
trace?

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

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Frank Swarbrick [frank.swarbr...@outlook.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:42 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

Do you mean like this?

integer, dimension(10) :: a, b, c
a = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10]
b = [2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11]
c = a + b
print *, "a = ", a
print *, "b = ", b
print *, "c = ", c

a =1   2   3   4   5   6
   7   8   9  10
b =2   3   4   5   6   7
   8   9  10  11
c =3   5   7   9  11  13
  15  17  19  21

Apparently added as part of the Fortran 90 standard.

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
Seymour J Metz 
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:16 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

Have they added array operations to Fortran?

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

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Bob 
Bridges [robhbrid...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:35 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

I haven't written anything in FORTRAN since some time in the late '70s.  But
even much more recently I heard it's regarded by number crunchers, engineers
say, as the best language for sheer speed.  Not so great for report writing
and formatting.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* If a problem has a single neck, it has a simple solution. */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Frank Swarbrick
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 21:22

I've been teaching myself (modern) Fortran the last few weeks.  Just
because.  It has an interesting behavior that I kind of like.

Normal IF statement:

if (something) then

end if

But it also has a "one line IF" (not sure offhand of the Fortran "name" for
this):

if (something) 

 must be on the same line as the if and the condition
(unless you specify the "line continuation character"), and of course only
one statement is allowed.  Kind of like the C/Java if statement with out a
statement block, but less dangerous because of the "on the same line"
requirement.  Here is one way I've used it in practice.

call get_command_argument(1, host)
if (inet_addr(host) .lt. 0) call error_stop("Host must be in dotted decimal
format.")
call get_command_argument(2, port_str)
read (port_str, '(i5)', iostat = iostat) port ! convert string 'port_str' to
integer 'port'
if (iostat .ne. 0 .or. port .le. 0) call error_stop("Port must be positive
numeric (0-32767).")

Using "if/then" instead of just "if" I'd have had this:

call get_command_argument(1, host)
if (inet_addr(host) .lt. 0) then
call error_stop("Host must be in dotted decimal format.")
end if
call get_command_argument(2, port_str)
read (port_str, '(i5)', iostat = iostat) port ! convert string 'port_str' to
integer 'port'
if (iostat .ne. 0 .or. port .le. 0) then
call error_stop("Port must be positive numeric (0-32767).")
end if

Given by absolute druthers I would have the then clause part of the single
line if instead of the if/end if, but its still pretty nice regardless, as
it doesn't cause as much "clutter" as error handling often does.

On a side note, I think Fortran has done a much better job than COBOL of
adding "modern" features (starting with Fortran 90 in 1990).  If only the
COBOL "designers" had followed in their footsteps.

And in my mind Fortran had even more to "make up" for in regards to it's
less than ideal beginnings.  Which Fortran can even be forgiven for then,
being I believe about five years older than COBOL (Cobol?).

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of
Bob Bridges 
Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:35 PM

The only language I can think of off-hand that doesn't require some sort of
END to close a DO (I'm sure there are others) is ISPF.  But, in REXX at
least, I never use single-statement DOs.  I see them all the time, and I
don't get it.  Like this:

  if x=0 then do
x=x+1
  end

Or, more painfully:

  select
when idx="T" then
  do

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread Tom Brennan

When I bought my Yamaha piano in 1989, I heard a story that Yamaha had
been supplying free pianos to universities for years. It was more than
them just being nice, they knew that someone practicing every day on the
school grand piano would likely go on to buy one, or be the decision
maker for an orchestra, night club, or whatever. I always thought that
was super smart of them. What I always thought was rather dumb, is that
IBM doesn't do similar with educational use of all their software. And
that's just copied bits ... no wood, metal, delivery, tuning, etc.

On 6/9/2020 5:02 AM, Bob Bridges wrote:

A coworker just sent me this brief article.

https://www.techrepublic.com/article/everyone-wants-to-retire-mainframes-but-74-of-modernization-efforts-fail/

I'm interested in two aspects of this:

1) The writer uses the word "modernization" quite a bit, and as far as I can tell she
uses it, without explanation, to mean "switching from mainframes to more recently invented
platforms". This is the old assumption we've talked about recently.

2) There's a really surprising number in there:

"...almost 100% of survey respondents plan to move legacy applications to the
cloud this year and the motivation to move is clear:

- 60% strongly agree they will be left behind competitively if they fail to
modernize
- 33% say modernizing has allowed the company to be more reactive to market
changes
- 34% say legacy modernization has accelerated digital transformation projects

About three-quarters of leaders said they have started a modernization program but
failed to complete it"

Can that "almost 100%" claim be true? I confess that three out of my last three clients
are talking about eliminating the mainframe, but I supposed it to be an anomaly. Maybe the survey
used the word "modernize" and the author ~assumed~ this must mean dropping the mainframe.

The article also says "Mainframes are still critical to business operations with 71%
of the Fortune 500 depending on these machines, including 92 of the world's 100 largest
banks". Come on - she's telling us that almost ~all~ of those companies intend to
switch legacy applications to the cloud? I just can't buy that. ~My~ bank had certainly
better not be planning such a move.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* If a problem has a single neck, it has a simple solution. */

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

Re: Old Code Gets Younger Every Year - Marianne Bellotti - Medium

2020-06-09 Thread Paul Gilmartin

On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 15:46:48 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:

>Ultimately it's a management issue common to all languages: if programmers are 
>not required to document and to keep documentation up to date, or, worse, are 
>prohibited from "wasting time" doing so, there will be downstream 
>consequences. In the case of COBOL there is also the pernicious myth that it 
>is self documenting - no language is.
>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_(programming_system)

>BTW, is there any shop still using CODASYL COBOL?

-- gil

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

Re: Old Code Gets Younger Every Year - Marianne Bellotti - Medium

Ultimately it's a management issue common to all languages: if programmers are 
not required to document and to keep documentation up to date, or, worse, are 
prohibited from "wasting time" doing so, there will be downstream consequences. 
In the case of COBOL there is also the pernicious myth that it is self 
documenting - no language is.

BTW, is there any shop still using CODASYL COBOL?


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


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Mark Regan [marktre...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:16 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Old Code Gets Younger Every Year - Marianne Bellotti - Medium

https://secure-web.cisco.com/1b-5A-k6m87QTuqyzbtnQj11SHVaJXaKjTnUPxpdSFiuZdewfEpzGWXFrNQU429jqXYBeZ4hkAlxT3dwOqilF88CSRyW-_NgSwlWsyj7sRwwUDLDv42jM5to-s_cB2PwkNZOAwdlREnOqHj8Z5NG_geFUVQiQSalS9G2b_-Vv-lOmNzr1w2DoxFhTgpEe1vl5WSMDwwChgYvdh2p8moci0AHnOb23dU-X5x1IgQZDBRRWxQV7SL-iUr-bBmPkjtCWqW5OoUGnpWYfYAgHKjgsIN0yd7RfpAuQstdzLgyxmoxhUXAMW7tz8nsr8yvioxLnon7_S31Bq7HViahTEIhK-n_F46JT4alOq53UrcW0QmMxL-X7nuNlhvhzy61B2WLAnBwT-dikGqH-DzsncM4a7jNKW-_Ok9sJM1Ef0H7sZ3n0XN5RiQm2VQ-pLaCJ3jGR_jCvq8GbbjxaqhnwgjHgAw/https%3A%2F%2Fmedium.com%2F%40bellmar%2Fold-code-gets-younger-every-year-3bd24c7f2262

Regards,

Mark T. Regan

--
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: Old Code Gets Younger Every Year - Marianne Bellotti - Medium

2020-06-09 Thread Tom Conley


On 6/9/2020 11:16 AM, Mark Regan wrote:

https://medium.com/@bellmar/old-code-gets-younger-every-year-3bd24c7f2262

Regards,

Mark T. Regan

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



Wow, an article about legacy code from someone who actually knows what 
the hell they're talking about.


Regards,
Tom Conley

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

Re: Goto Statements

2020-06-09 Thread Peter Sylvester


On 08/06/2020 12:35, Seymour J Metz wrote:

Didn't Datamation introduce COMEFROM much earlier?


It seems a small inter"think" with the archive service in my head is required 
:-)

Thanks.

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

Re: COBOL Question

Partially. Does Fortran now have reduction operators, e.g., inner product, 
trace?


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


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Frank Swarbrick [frank.swarbr...@outlook.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:42 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

Do you mean like this?

integer, dimension(10) :: a, b, c
a = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10]
b = [2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11]
c = a + b
print *, "a = ", a
print *, "b = ", b
print *, "c = ", c

a =1   2   3   4   5   6
   7   8   9  10
b =2   3   4   5   6   7
   8   9  10  11
c =3   5   7   9  11  13
  15  17  19  21

Apparently added as part of the Fortran 90 standard.


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
Seymour J Metz 
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:16 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

Have they added array operations to Fortran?


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


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Bob 
Bridges [robhbrid...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:35 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

I haven't written anything in FORTRAN since some time in the late '70s.  But
even much more recently I heard it's regarded by number crunchers, engineers
say, as the best language for sheer speed.  Not so great for report writing
and formatting.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* If a problem has a single neck, it has a simple solution. */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Frank Swarbrick
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 21:22

I've been teaching myself (modern) Fortran the last few weeks.  Just
because.  It has an interesting behavior that I kind of like.

Normal IF statement:

if (something) then
   
   
end if

But it also has a "one line IF" (not sure offhand of the Fortran "name" for
this):

if (something) 

 must be on the same line as the if and the condition
(unless you specify the "line continuation character"), and of course only
one statement is allowed.  Kind of like the C/Java if statement with out a
statement block, but less dangerous because of the "on the same line"
requirement.  Here is one way I've used it in practice.

call get_command_argument(1, host)
if (inet_addr(host) .lt. 0) call error_stop("Host must be in dotted decimal
format.")
call get_command_argument(2, port_str)
read (port_str, '(i5)', iostat = iostat) port ! convert string 'port_str' to
integer 'port'
if (iostat .ne. 0 .or. port .le. 0) call error_stop("Port must be positive
numeric (0-32767).")

Using "if/then" instead of just "if" I'd have had this:

call get_command_argument(1, host)
if (inet_addr(host) .lt. 0) then
call error_stop("Host must be in dotted decimal format.")
end if
call get_command_argument(2, port_str)
read (port_str, '(i5)', iostat = iostat) port ! convert string 'port_str' to
integer 'port'
if (iostat .ne. 0 .or. port .le. 0) then
call error_stop("Port must be positive numeric (0-32767).")
end if

Given by absolute druthers I would have the then clause part of the single
line if instead of the if/end if, but its still pretty nice regardless, as
it doesn't cause as much "clutter" as error handling often does.

On a side note, I think Fortran has done a much better job than COBOL of
adding "modern" features (starting with Fortran 90 in 1990).  If only the
COBOL "designers" had followed in their footsteps.

And in my mind Fortran had even more to "make up" for in regards to it's
less than ideal beginnings.  Which Fortran can even be forgiven for then,
being I believe about five years older than COBOL (Cobol?).


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of
Bob Bridges 
Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:35 PM

The only language I can think of off-hand that doesn't require some sort of
END to close a DO (I'm sure there are others) is ISPF.  But, in REXX at
least, I never use single-statement DOs.  I see them all the time, and I
don't get it.  Like this:

  if x=0 then do
x=x+1
  end

Or, more painfully:

  select
when idx="T" then
  do
countt=countt+1
  end
when idx="U" then
  do
countu=countu+1
  end
when idx="V" then
  do
countv=countv+1
  end
when idx="W" then
  do
countw=countw+1
  end
otherwise
  do
countx=countx+1
  end
  end

Why?  If it were easier to read, I might sympathize.  But it's harder, not
easier.

Old Code Gets Younger Every Year - Marianne Bellotti - Medium

2020-06-09 Thread Mark Regan

https://medium.com/@bellmar/old-code-gets-younger-every-year-3bd24c7f2262

Regards,

Mark T. Regan

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

Re: [External] Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 9:21 AM Lionel B Dyck  wrote:

> Y'all stop using logic and reason - this is an emotional issue that the
> author and others are invested in and has nothing to do with IBM
> effectively telling the world that the mainframe is dead based on all the
> layoffs that have occurred over the last 20-25 years, or that IBM continues
> to offload software development or outright sells IBM software to other
> companies, or that IBM has bought into the Cloud and has reduced their
> investment in developing z/OS, or . . . .
>
> And then there is the vast amounts of money to be made by replacing a
> mainframe - I'm sure that those vendors offering those services only have
> the best interests of the current mainframe users at heart.
>
> It's Beta vs VHS all over again
>

Beta lost due to marketing idiocy. It was superior to VHS, technically, but
"overpriced" compared to VHS. So the consumer went with the inferior but
more affordable VHS. You're right -- exactly like z/OS vs. Windows and
zSeries vs. AMD/Intel.



>
> Lionel B. Dyck <
> Website: https://www.lbdsoftware.com


-- 
People in sleeping bags are the soft tacos of the bear world.
Maranatha! <><
John McKown

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

Re: [External] Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 9:19 AM Seymour J Metz  wrote:

> Is that like the eternal ax (that handle has been changed 20 times and the
> blade 30 times, but it's still the same ax)?
>

Or like I read in one book: "I've only had one drink. It's been topped off
20 times. But it's only one drink." Or more like a military organization.
The U.K Coldstream Guards has been in existence since 1650. Lots of
different commanders and soldiers. But the same regiment.



>
>
> --
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
>
> 
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf
> of Pommier, Rex [rpomm...@sfgmembers.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:59 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: [External] Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"
>
> Maybe based on their "logic", my z14 is 30 years old because we're running
> an application on it that was written in the late 80s.  Never mind that it
> has been maintained for the past 30+ years, since we can find 30 year old
> code in the application, the entire thing must be 30+ years old.
>
> Rex
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf
> Of Peter Bishop
> Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:24 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: [External] Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"
>
> Interesting re 2):
>
> "The survey found that organizations are running an average of four
> mainframes with an average age of 17 years. Sixty-four percent are running
> mainframes between 10 and 20 years old, with 28% running machines that are
> 20 to 30 years old. "
>
> So 2/7 are running machines over 20+ years old?  And 2/3 over 10 years?
> What does that even mean?  Smells fishy to me.  What is the sample size?
> Is it biased somehow?
>
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> On 9/06/2020 10:02 pm, Bob Bridges wrote:
> > A coworker just sent me this brief article.
> >
> >
> https://secure-web.cisco.com/1JN9E1bGCX8mpl6qPkrSEev2O0fNt81naiQJbFUhhlGtqM9bJimsEWYFVu_WWDFv8b1LEShSbIYjTypvbccq0QTe8fSSnqtPTlIl5WSobiXufZ6TbWYqAd2zB6QnAJclJP_rAf4DgxXIypS7ymmvlkSe5TWlyy0y-0iLJVkpBun7o0cLqD4cYGunrKLpI9mR7jXtQTEW5mFdkn4ebl587wTx_Mz8k7HoG9dO1TptQ9A5akIhDp4Cvmz46L8Nvm7qca8D7I2KGd5alIDSNBefZDXYOIDnU14SegaPCQ5ON9WE8lD77ARJjrfke6SFteYf1D9CilsWGSdey--UR8R4B30tUGtIG2gflxGCGCckkwQdiMhCYFTxxVKpuXNl8glorWalBxAVso0bIdzEn7xAtz-0iemamNd1GxIAswPave4LokMoaE1c8NYBjr-kWaGaB/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.techrepublic.com%2Farticle%2Feveryone-wants-to-retire-mainfram
> > es-but-74-of-modernization-efforts-fail/
> >
> > I'm interested in two aspects of this:
> >
> > 1) The writer uses the word "modernization" quite a bit, and as far as I
> can tell she uses it, without explanation, to mean "switching from
> mainframes to more recently invented platforms".  This is the old
> assumption we've talked about recently.
> >
> > 2) There's a really surprising number in there:
> >
> > "...almost 100% of survey respondents plan to move legacy applications
> to the cloud this year and the motivation to move is clear:
> >
> > - 60% strongly agree they will be left behind competitively if they
> > fail to modernize
> > - 33% say modernizing has allowed the company to be more reactive to
> > market changes
> > - 34% say legacy modernization has accelerated digital transformation
> > projects
> >
> > About three-quarters of leaders said they have started a modernization
> program but failed to complete it"
> >
> > Can that "almost 100%" claim be true?  I confess that three out of my
> last three clients are talking about eliminating the mainframe, but I
> supposed it to be an anomaly.  Maybe the survey used the word "modernize"
> and the author ~assumed~ this must mean dropping the mainframe.
> >
> > The article also says "Mainframes are still critical to business
> operations with 71% of the Fortune 500 depending on these machines,
> including 92 of the world's 100 largest banks".  Come on - she's telling us
> that almost ~all~ of those companies intend to switch legacy applications
> to the cloud?  I just can't buy that.  ~My~ bank had certainly better not
> be planning such a move.
> >
> > ---
> > Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313
> >
> > /* If a problem has a single neck, it has a simple solution. */
> >
> > --
> > 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
>
>
> 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

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread R.S.

Regarding 100% customers:
- Did you think about replatforming?
- Yes.
(OK, another one on the list)
- And what?
- And concluded it would be very stupid idea. We did the analysis and we
know that.

Another explanation:
Mainframe shops are sometimes big companies. It is very likely to find
an idiot in large group. Ask the idiot, note his responses. Is the idiot
the person who decide? Well...
It is also somehow likely to find out a person who think Churchill,
Roosevelt and Stalin were soccer players.

--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland

W dniu 09.06.2020 o 14:02, Bob Bridges pisze:

A coworker just sent me this brief article.

https://www.techrepublic.com/article/everyone-wants-to-retire-mainframes-but-74-of-modernization-efforts-fail/

I'm interested in two aspects of this:

2) There's a really surprising number in there:

"...almost 100% of survey respondents plan to move legacy applications to the
cloud this year and the motivation to move is clear:

About three-quarters of leaders said they have started a modernization program but
failed to complete it"

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* If a problem has a single neck, it has a simple solution. */

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

Jeśli nie jesteś adresatem tej wiadomości:

- powiadom nas o tym w mailu zwrotnym (dziękujemy!),
- usuń trwale tę wiadomość (i wszystkie kopie, które wydrukowałeś lub zapisałeś
na dysku).
Wiadomość ta może zawierać chronione prawem informacje, które może wykorzystać
tylko adresat.Przypominamy, że każdy, kto rozpowszechnia (kopiuje, rozprowadza)
tę wiadomość lub podejmuje podobne działania, narusza prawo i może podlegać
karze.

mBank S.A. z siedzibą w Warszawie, ul. Senatorska 18, 00-950
Warszawa,www.mBank.pl, e-mail: kont...@mbank.pl. Sąd Rejonowy dla m. st.
Warszawy XII Wydział Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sądowego, KRS 025237,
NIP: 526-021-50-88. Kapitał zakładowy (opłacony w całości) według stanu na
01.01.2020 r. wynosi 169.401.468 złotych.

If you are not the addressee of this message:

- let us know by replying to this e-mail (thank you!),
- delete this message permanently (including all the copies which you have
printed out or saved).
This message may contain legally protected information, which may be used
exclusively by the addressee.Please be reminded that anyone who disseminates
(copies, distributes) this message or takes any similar action, violates the
law and may be penalised.

mBank S.A. with its registered office in Warsaw, ul. Senatorska 18, 00-950
Warszawa,www.mBank.pl, e-mail: kont...@mbank.pl. District Court for the Capital
City of Warsaw, 12th Commercial Division of the National Court Register, KRS
025237, NIP: 526-021-50-88. Fully paid-up share capital amounting to PLN
169.401.468 as at 1 January 2020.

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

Re: COBOL Question

I couldn't tell you.  But it's what I have been running on Windows recently.  I 
imagine it might (probably?) run on Linux for Z.

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
Seymour J Metz 
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:38 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

What about gcc Fortran? Does that run on OMVS? Linux on Z?

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

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Frank Swarbrick [frank.swarbr...@outlook.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:22 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

Here's the question I have about Fortran support.  Why does IBM support modern 
Fortran on platforms like Linux and AIX, but mainframe Fortran (IBM VS FORTRAN) 
is still at FORTRAN 77 level and seems to have had no enhancements other than 
Language Environment support since...1993?  I know if I were a Fortran 
developer this would piss me off greatly.

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
Evans-Young, Darren 
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 8:16 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

FORTRAN 90 was a significant upgrade over previous standards. Mainly, free-form 
input source statements.
Also, increase the length of identifiers from 6 characters to 31 characters, 
and upper/lowecase keywords/identifiers.

The latest standard is Fortran 2018.

I still teach Fortran to my Honor students. It's easy to learn for a first 
programming language, very forgiving, and
you can do a lot with it. I still get flack from uninformed individuals, you 
know, the ones that say no one uses mainframes
anymore, no one uses Fortran anymore, no on uses COBOL anymore. Every year, a 
couple of my students email me back
to say how having Fortran experience on their resume helped them land a job or 
internship; companies like NASA, NOAA,
Lockheed-Martin, etc. They are usually the only applicants out of hundreds that 
list Fortran experience.

Darren

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
lenru...@gmail.com 
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 8:52 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

On, long ago and on some DOS/VS Cobol compiler, after a compiler upgrade, there 
was a problem with a statement something like this:
READ some-fileAT END do somethingMOVE A TO B.
See the problem?  The period after the AT END was omitted.  The old compiler 
only allowed one statement after AT END (maybe a bug) but after it honored the 
period.
It was a bear to find.  It worked before and for a long time after the compiler 
change, until it was complied again.
On Monday, June 8, 2020, 08:22:18 PM CDT, Frank Swarbrick 
 wrote:

 I've been teaching myself (modern) Fortran the last few weeks.  Just because.  
It has an interesting behavior that I kind of like.

Normal IF statement:

if (something) then

end if

But it also has a "one line IF" (not sure offhand of the Fortran "name" for 
this):

if (something) 

 must be on the same line as the if and the condition (unless 
you specify the "line continuation character"), and of course only one 
statement is allowed.  Kind of like the C/Java if statement with out a 
statement block, but less dangerous because of the "on the same line" 
requirement.  Here is one way I've used it in practice.

call get_command_argument(1, host)
if (inet_addr(host) .lt. 0) call error_stop("Host must be in dotted decimal 
format.")
call get_command_argument(2, port_str)
read (port_str, '(i5)', iostat = iostat) port ! convert string 'port_str' to 
integer 'port'
if (iostat .ne. 0 .or. port .le. 0) call error_stop("Port must be positive 
numeric (0-32767).")

Using "if/then" instead of just "if" I'd have had this:

call get_command_argument(1, host)
if (inet_addr(host) .lt. 0) then
call error_stop("Host must be in dotted decimal format.")
end if
call get_command_argument(2, port_str)
read (port_str, '(i5)', iostat = iostat) port ! convert string 'port_str' to 
integer 'port'
if (iostat .ne. 0 .or. port .le. 0) then
call error_stop("Port must be positive numeric (0-32767).")
end if

Given by absolute druthers I would have the then clause part of the single line 
if instead of the if/end if, but its still pretty nice regardless, as it 
doesn't cause as much "clutter" as error handling often does.

On a side note, I think Fortran has done a much better job than COBOL of adding 
"modern" features (starting with Fortran 90 in 1990).  If only the COBOL 
"designers" had followed in their footsteps.

And in my mind Fortran had even more to "make up" for in regards to it's less 
than ideal beginnings.  Which Fortran can even be forgiven for then, being I 
believe about five years older than COBOL (Cobol?).

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of Bob 
Bridges

Re: COBOL Question

Do you mean like this?

integer, dimension(10) :: a, b, c
a = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10]
b = [2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11]
c = a + b
print *, "a = ", a
print *, "b = ", b
print *, "c = ", c

a =1   2   3   4   5   6
   7   8   9  10
b =2   3   4   5   6   7
   8   9  10  11
c =3   5   7   9  11  13
  15  17  19  21

Apparently added as part of the Fortran 90 standard.


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
Seymour J Metz 
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:16 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

Have they added array operations to Fortran?


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


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Bob 
Bridges [robhbrid...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:35 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

I haven't written anything in FORTRAN since some time in the late '70s.  But
even much more recently I heard it's regarded by number crunchers, engineers
say, as the best language for sheer speed.  Not so great for report writing
and formatting.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* If a problem has a single neck, it has a simple solution. */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Frank Swarbrick
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 21:22

I've been teaching myself (modern) Fortran the last few weeks.  Just
because.  It has an interesting behavior that I kind of like.

Normal IF statement:

if (something) then
   
   
end if

But it also has a "one line IF" (not sure offhand of the Fortran "name" for
this):

if (something) 

 must be on the same line as the if and the condition
(unless you specify the "line continuation character"), and of course only
one statement is allowed.  Kind of like the C/Java if statement with out a
statement block, but less dangerous because of the "on the same line"
requirement.  Here is one way I've used it in practice.

call get_command_argument(1, host)
if (inet_addr(host) .lt. 0) call error_stop("Host must be in dotted decimal
format.")
call get_command_argument(2, port_str)
read (port_str, '(i5)', iostat = iostat) port ! convert string 'port_str' to
integer 'port'
if (iostat .ne. 0 .or. port .le. 0) call error_stop("Port must be positive
numeric (0-32767).")

Using "if/then" instead of just "if" I'd have had this:

call get_command_argument(1, host)
if (inet_addr(host) .lt. 0) then
call error_stop("Host must be in dotted decimal format.")
end if
call get_command_argument(2, port_str)
read (port_str, '(i5)', iostat = iostat) port ! convert string 'port_str' to
integer 'port'
if (iostat .ne. 0 .or. port .le. 0) then
call error_stop("Port must be positive numeric (0-32767).")
end if

Given by absolute druthers I would have the then clause part of the single
line if instead of the if/end if, but its still pretty nice regardless, as
it doesn't cause as much "clutter" as error handling often does.

On a side note, I think Fortran has done a much better job than COBOL of
adding "modern" features (starting with Fortran 90 in 1990).  If only the
COBOL "designers" had followed in their footsteps.

And in my mind Fortran had even more to "make up" for in regards to it's
less than ideal beginnings.  Which Fortran can even be forgiven for then,
being I believe about five years older than COBOL (Cobol?).


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of
Bob Bridges 
Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:35 PM

The only language I can think of off-hand that doesn't require some sort of
END to close a DO (I'm sure there are others) is ISPF.  But, in REXX at
least, I never use single-statement DOs.  I see them all the time, and I
don't get it.  Like this:

  if x=0 then do
x=x+1
  end

Or, more painfully:

  select
when idx="T" then
  do
countt=countt+1
  end
when idx="U" then
  do
countu=countu+1
  end
when idx="V" then
  do
countv=countv+1
  end
when idx="W" then
  do
countw=countw+1
  end
otherwise
  do
countx=countx+1
  end
  end

Why?  If it were easier to read, I might sympathize.  But it's harder, not
easier.

--
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: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread Joe Monk

What do you think about paved roads? Theyre something else, huh? Nice and
smooth...

Joe

On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 9:41 AM Seymour J Metz  wrote:

> How long has your company been using electricity? Time to modernize.
>
> Yes, I know that you've replaced the wiring three times and have solar
> power on your roof, but it's still the same obsolete electricity.
>
>
> --
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
>
> 
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf
> of R.S. [r.skoru...@bremultibank.com.pl]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:35 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"
>
> W dniu 09.06.2020 o 14:24, Peter Bishop pisze:
> > Interesting re 2):
> >
> > "The survey found that organizations are running an average of four
> > mainframes with an average age of 17 years. Sixty-four percent are
> > running mainframes between 10 and 20 years old, with 28% running
> > machines that are 20 to 30 years old. "
> >
> > So 2/7 are running machines over 20+ years old?  And 2/3 over 10
> > years?  What does that even mean?  Smells fishy to me.  What is the
> > sample size?  Is it biased somehow?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
>
> It can be understood as how long the company is using mainframe, not how
> old is the currently used CPC.
> Of course mainframe is old, obsolete, expensive... blah, blah, blah...
>
>
> --
> Radoslaw Skorupka
> Lodz, Poland
>
>
>
>
>
> ==
>
> Jeśli nie jesteś adresatem tej wiadomości:
>
> - powiadom nas o tym w mailu zwrotnym (dziękujemy!),
> - usuń trwale tę wiadomość (i wszystkie kopie, które wydrukowałeś lub
> zapisałeś na dysku).
> Wiadomość ta może zawierać chronione prawem informacje, które może
> wykorzystać tylko adresat.Przypominamy, że każdy, kto rozpowszechnia
> (kopiuje, rozprowadza) tę wiadomość lub podejmuje podobne działania,
> narusza prawo i może podlegać karze.
>
> mBank S.A. z siedzibą w Warszawie, ul. Senatorska 18, 00-950 Warszawa,
> http://secure-web.cisco.com/1fweH3hW6JwpfA1BxzPSBmm-WkVTANCmc6rFRK7QRpvY86fnb3PXJgmZVxpaHo9aiOfxJH54mINVlA9th-bP8Eu-laZ_a1NfFSO_gQNmLx3xNiJhx9n_qoxpD1cCNZfNO920Tqxbqq-4GS3C30F_l0jx3yKLKN9g0EssIwtsjSRoKWa_9lYIpQdxkTwP8oCCgd2JPGa4Z-r4D89-_QriOKTzIeRPNAujA4UjybaKA771z-ad9BBlkDqr8N_V-_8qE2mpt-JFaxraHSX5CQ4yUSUPQ4OVQQb2BRSA6bOo_-YtEsMvtRUkLV193ZGgf47dV7t4J2rRT9vBN3m3eHEZr6mRN6p5V7QF3nftQ4hSZ0vhpHcCxxtYES-pvoDd452wqkIv5kVI0C5YmB5DJzW_n0GGhtIIis6yzHcSCFtCxD3GjjlEpe8Rys5sn1d5KFh_-/http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mBank.pl,
> e-mail: kont...@mbank.pl. Sąd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy XII Wydział
> Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sądowego, KRS 025237, NIP:
> 526-021-50-88. Kapitał zakładowy (opłacony w całości) według stanu na
> 01.01.2020 r. wynosi 169.401.468 złotych.
>
> If you are not the addressee of this message:
>
> - let us know by replying to this e-mail (thank you!),
> - delete this message permanently (including all the copies which you have
> printed out or saved).
> This message may contain legally protected information, which may be used
> exclusively by the addressee.Please be reminded that anyone who
> disseminates (copies, distributes) this message or takes any similar
> action, violates the law and may be penalised.
>
> mBank S.A. with its registered office in Warsaw, ul. Senatorska 18, 00-950
> Warszawa,
> http://secure-web.cisco.com/1fweH3hW6JwpfA1BxzPSBmm-WkVTANCmc6rFRK7QRpvY86fnb3PXJgmZVxpaHo9aiOfxJH54mINVlA9th-bP8Eu-laZ_a1NfFSO_gQNmLx3xNiJhx9n_qoxpD1cCNZfNO920Tqxbqq-4GS3C30F_l0jx3yKLKN9g0EssIwtsjSRoKWa_9lYIpQdxkTwP8oCCgd2JPGa4Z-r4D89-_QriOKTzIeRPNAujA4UjybaKA771z-ad9BBlkDqr8N_V-_8qE2mpt-JFaxraHSX5CQ4yUSUPQ4OVQQb2BRSA6bOo_-YtEsMvtRUkLV193ZGgf47dV7t4J2rRT9vBN3m3eHEZr6mRN6p5V7QF3nftQ4hSZ0vhpHcCxxtYES-pvoDd452wqkIv5kVI0C5YmB5DJzW_n0GGhtIIis6yzHcSCFtCxD3GjjlEpe8Rys5sn1d5KFh_-/http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mBank.pl,
> e-mail: kont...@mbank.pl. District Court for the Capital City of Warsaw,
> 12th Commercial Division of the National Court Register, KRS 025237,
> NIP: 526-021-50-88. Fully paid-up share capital amounting to PLN
> 169.401.468 as at 1 January 2020.
>
> --
> 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: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

How long has your company been using electricity? Time to modernize.

Yes, I know that you've replaced the wiring three times and have solar power on 
your roof, but it's still the same obsolete electricity.


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


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
R.S. [r.skoru...@bremultibank.com.pl]
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:35 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

W dniu 09.06.2020 o 14:24, Peter Bishop pisze:
> Interesting re 2):
>
> "The survey found that organizations are running an average of four
> mainframes with an average age of 17 years. Sixty-four percent are
> running mainframes between 10 and 20 years old, with 28% running
> machines that are 20 to 30 years old. "
>
> So 2/7 are running machines over 20+ years old?  And 2/3 over 10
> years?  What does that even mean?  Smells fishy to me.  What is the
> sample size?  Is it biased somehow?
>
> Cheers,
> Peter

It can be understood as how long the company is using mainframe, not how
old is the currently used CPC.
Of course mainframe is old, obsolete, expensive... blah, blah, blah...


--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland





==

Jeśli nie jesteś adresatem tej wiadomości:

- powiadom nas o tym w mailu zwrotnym (dziękujemy!),
- usuń trwale tę wiadomość (i wszystkie kopie, które wydrukowałeś lub zapisałeś 
na dysku).
Wiadomość ta może zawierać chronione prawem informacje, które może wykorzystać 
tylko adresat.Przypominamy, że każdy, kto rozpowszechnia (kopiuje, rozprowadza) 
tę wiadomość lub podejmuje podobne działania, narusza prawo i może podlegać 
karze.

mBank S.A. z siedzibą w Warszawie, ul. Senatorska 18, 00-950 
Warszawa,http://secure-web.cisco.com/1fweH3hW6JwpfA1BxzPSBmm-WkVTANCmc6rFRK7QRpvY86fnb3PXJgmZVxpaHo9aiOfxJH54mINVlA9th-bP8Eu-laZ_a1NfFSO_gQNmLx3xNiJhx9n_qoxpD1cCNZfNO920Tqxbqq-4GS3C30F_l0jx3yKLKN9g0EssIwtsjSRoKWa_9lYIpQdxkTwP8oCCgd2JPGa4Z-r4D89-_QriOKTzIeRPNAujA4UjybaKA771z-ad9BBlkDqr8N_V-_8qE2mpt-JFaxraHSX5CQ4yUSUPQ4OVQQb2BRSA6bOo_-YtEsMvtRUkLV193ZGgf47dV7t4J2rRT9vBN3m3eHEZr6mRN6p5V7QF3nftQ4hSZ0vhpHcCxxtYES-pvoDd452wqkIv5kVI0C5YmB5DJzW_n0GGhtIIis6yzHcSCFtCxD3GjjlEpe8Rys5sn1d5KFh_-/http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mBank.pl,
 e-mail: kont...@mbank.pl. Sąd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy XII Wydział 
Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sądowego, KRS 025237, NIP: 526-021-50-88. 
Kapitał zakładowy (opłacony w całości) według stanu na 01.01.2020 r. wynosi 
169.401.468 złotych.

If you are not the addressee of this message:

- let us know by replying to this e-mail (thank you!),
- delete this message permanently (including all the copies which you have 
printed out or saved).
This message may contain legally protected information, which may be used 
exclusively by the addressee.Please be reminded that anyone who disseminates 
(copies, distributes) this message or takes any similar action, violates the 
law and may be penalised.

mBank S.A. with its registered office in Warsaw, ul. Senatorska 18, 00-950 
Warszawa,http://secure-web.cisco.com/1fweH3hW6JwpfA1BxzPSBmm-WkVTANCmc6rFRK7QRpvY86fnb3PXJgmZVxpaHo9aiOfxJH54mINVlA9th-bP8Eu-laZ_a1NfFSO_gQNmLx3xNiJhx9n_qoxpD1cCNZfNO920Tqxbqq-4GS3C30F_l0jx3yKLKN9g0EssIwtsjSRoKWa_9lYIpQdxkTwP8oCCgd2JPGa4Z-r4D89-_QriOKTzIeRPNAujA4UjybaKA771z-ad9BBlkDqr8N_V-_8qE2mpt-JFaxraHSX5CQ4yUSUPQ4OVQQb2BRSA6bOo_-YtEsMvtRUkLV193ZGgf47dV7t4J2rRT9vBN3m3eHEZr6mRN6p5V7QF3nftQ4hSZ0vhpHcCxxtYES-pvoDd452wqkIv5kVI0C5YmB5DJzW_n0GGhtIIis6yzHcSCFtCxD3GjjlEpe8Rys5sn1d5KFh_-/http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mBank.pl,
 e-mail: kont...@mbank.pl. District Court for the Capital City of Warsaw, 12th 
Commercial Division of the National Court Register, KRS 025237, NIP: 
526-021-50-88. Fully paid-up share capital amounting to PLN 169.401.468 as at 1 
January 2020.

--
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: COBOL Question

What about gcc Fortran? Does that run on OMVS? Linux on Z?


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


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Frank Swarbrick [frank.swarbr...@outlook.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:22 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

Here's the question I have about Fortran support.  Why does IBM support modern 
Fortran on platforms like Linux and AIX, but mainframe Fortran (IBM VS FORTRAN) 
is still at FORTRAN 77 level and seems to have had no enhancements other than 
Language Environment support since...1993?  I know if I were a Fortran 
developer this would piss me off greatly.


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
Evans-Young, Darren 
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 8:16 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

FORTRAN 90 was a significant upgrade over previous standards. Mainly, free-form 
input source statements.
Also, increase the length of identifiers from 6 characters to 31 characters, 
and upper/lowecase keywords/identifiers.

The latest standard is Fortran 2018.

I still teach Fortran to my Honor students. It's easy to learn for a first 
programming language, very forgiving, and
you can do a lot with it. I still get flack from uninformed individuals, you 
know, the ones that say no one uses mainframes
anymore, no one uses Fortran anymore, no on uses COBOL anymore. Every year, a 
couple of my students email me back
to say how having Fortran experience on their resume helped them land a job or 
internship; companies like NASA, NOAA,
Lockheed-Martin, etc. They are usually the only applicants out of hundreds that 
list Fortran experience.

Darren


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
lenru...@gmail.com 
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 8:52 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

On, long ago and on some DOS/VS Cobol compiler, after a compiler upgrade, there 
was a problem with a statement something like this:
READ some-fileAT END do somethingMOVE A TO B.
See the problem?  The period after the AT END was omitted.  The old compiler 
only allowed one statement after AT END (maybe a bug) but after it honored the 
period.
It was a bear to find.  It worked before and for a long time after the compiler 
change, until it was complied again.
On Monday, June 8, 2020, 08:22:18 PM CDT, Frank Swarbrick 
 wrote:

 I've been teaching myself (modern) Fortran the last few weeks.  Just because.  
It has an interesting behavior that I kind of like.

Normal IF statement:

if (something) then
  
  
end if

But it also has a "one line IF" (not sure offhand of the Fortran "name" for 
this):

if (something) 

 must be on the same line as the if and the condition (unless 
you specify the "line continuation character"), and of course only one 
statement is allowed.  Kind of like the C/Java if statement with out a 
statement block, but less dangerous because of the "on the same line" 
requirement.  Here is one way I've used it in practice.

call get_command_argument(1, host)
if (inet_addr(host) .lt. 0) call error_stop("Host must be in dotted decimal 
format.")
call get_command_argument(2, port_str)
read (port_str, '(i5)', iostat = iostat) port ! convert string 'port_str' to 
integer 'port'
if (iostat .ne. 0 .or. port .le. 0) call error_stop("Port must be positive 
numeric (0-32767).")

Using "if/then" instead of just "if" I'd have had this:

call get_command_argument(1, host)
if (inet_addr(host) .lt. 0) then
call error_stop("Host must be in dotted decimal format.")
end if
call get_command_argument(2, port_str)
read (port_str, '(i5)', iostat = iostat) port ! convert string 'port_str' to 
integer 'port'
if (iostat .ne. 0 .or. port .le. 0) then
call error_stop("Port must be positive numeric (0-32767).")
end if

Given by absolute druthers I would have the then clause part of the single line 
if instead of the if/end if, but its still pretty nice regardless, as it 
doesn't cause as much "clutter" as error handling often does.

On a side note, I think Fortran has done a much better job than COBOL of adding 
"modern" features (starting with Fortran 90 in 1990).  If only the COBOL 
"designers" had followed in their footsteps.

And in my mind Fortran had even more to "make up" for in regards to it's less 
than ideal beginnings.  Which Fortran can even be forgiven for then, being I 
believe about five years older than COBOL (Cobol?).



From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of Bob 
Bridges 
Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:35 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

The only language I can think of off-hand that doesn't require some sort of END 
to close a DO (I'm sure there are others) is ISPF.  But, in REXX at least, I 
never use single-statement DOs.  I see them all the time, and I don't get

Re: [External] Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread Carmen Vitullo

" It's Beta vs VHS all over again" 
GREAT analogy, like DVD vs Laser DISC 
and who won out, the better of the two ? nope 


Carmen Vitullo 

- Original Message -

From: "Lionel B Dyck"  
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:20:47 AM 
Subject: Re: [External] Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes" 

Y'all stop using logic and reason - this is an emotional issue that the author 
and others are invested in and has nothing to do with IBM effectively telling 
the world that the mainframe is dead based on all the layoffs that have 
occurred over the last 20-25 years, or that IBM continues to offload software 
development or outright sells IBM software to other companies, or that IBM has 
bought into the Cloud and has reduced their investment in developing z/OS, or . 
. . . 

And then there is the vast amounts of money to be made by replacing a mainframe 
- I'm sure that those vendors offering those services only have the best 
interests of the current mainframe users at heart. 

It's Beta vs VHS all over again 

Lionel B. Dyck < 
Website: https://www.lbdsoftware.com 

"Worry more about your character than your reputation. Character is what you 
are, reputation merely what others think you are." - John Wooden 

-Original Message- 
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Pommier, Rex 
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:58 AM 
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: [External] Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes" 

So does this mean that 2/3 of companies out there are running unsupported 
hardware and software? 

-Original Message- 
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Raphaël Jacquot 
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:48 AM 
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: [External] Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes" 

Le 09/06/2020 à 14:24, Peter Bishop a écrit : 
> Interesting re 2): 
> 
> "The survey found that organizations are running an average of four 
> mainframes with an average age of 17 years. Sixty-four percent are 
> running mainframes between 10 and 20 years old, with 28% running 
> machines that are 20 to 30 years old. " 
> 
> So 2/7 are running machines over 20+ years old? And 2/3 over 10 
> years? What does that even mean? Smells fishy to me. What is the 
> sample size? Is it biased somehow? 
> 
> Cheers, 
> Peter 

it does make sense if out of those 4 machines, they have older and newer 
boxes... 

Raphael 

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


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 

-- 
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: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread R.S.


W dniu 09.06.2020 o 14:24, Peter Bishop pisze:

Interesting re 2):

"The survey found that organizations are running an average of four 
mainframes with an average age of 17 years. Sixty-four percent are 
running mainframes between 10 and 20 years old, with 28% running 
machines that are 20 to 30 years old. "


So 2/7 are running machines over 20+ years old?  And 2/3 over 10 
years?  What does that even mean?  Smells fishy to me.  What is the 
sample size?  Is it biased somehow?


Cheers,
Peter


It can be understood as how long the company is using mainframe, not how 
old is the currently used CPC.

Of course mainframe is old, obsolete, expensive... blah, blah, blah...


--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland





==

Jeśli nie jesteś adresatem tej wiadomości:

- powiadom nas o tym w mailu zwrotnym (dziękujemy!),
- usuń trwale tę wiadomość (i wszystkie kopie, które wydrukowałeś lub zapisałeś 
na dysku).
Wiadomość ta może zawierać chronione prawem informacje, które może wykorzystać 
tylko adresat.Przypominamy, że każdy, kto rozpowszechnia (kopiuje, rozprowadza) 
tę wiadomość lub podejmuje podobne działania, narusza prawo i może podlegać 
karze.

mBank S.A. z siedzibą w Warszawie, ul. Senatorska 18, 00-950 
Warszawa,www.mBank.pl, e-mail: kont...@mbank.pl. Sąd Rejonowy dla m. st. 
Warszawy XII Wydział Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sądowego, KRS 025237, 
NIP: 526-021-50-88. Kapitał zakładowy (opłacony w całości) według stanu na 
01.01.2020 r. wynosi 169.401.468 złotych.

If you are not the addressee of this message:

- let us know by replying to this e-mail (thank you!),
- delete this message permanently (including all the copies which you have 
printed out or saved).
This message may contain legally protected information, which may be used 
exclusively by the addressee.Please be reminded that anyone who disseminates 
(copies, distributes) this message or takes any similar action, violates the 
law and may be penalised.

mBank S.A. with its registered office in Warsaw, ul. Senatorska 18, 00-950 
Warszawa,www.mBank.pl, e-mail: kont...@mbank.pl. District Court for the Capital 
City of Warsaw, 12th Commercial Division of the National Court Register, KRS 
025237, NIP: 526-021-50-88. Fully paid-up share capital amounting to PLN 
169.401.468 as at 1 January 2020.

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

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

Time sharing systems with each user having his own CMS virtual machine goes 
back a long way; at least to National CSS.

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

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
John McKown [john.archie.mck...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:31 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 7:56 AM Ward Able, Grant  wrote:

> There's no such thing as The Cloud - it's just someone else's
> computer...
>

And it's just a re-invention of "time sharing". Well, except that each
client has its own set of virtual machines (maybe real machines, but I
doubt it) with their data on one or more SAN disks (LUNs?). I remember that
from the 1970s (not sure about the date). I do remember the college where I
went (U.T. Arlington) had a few terminals (the IBM "selectric typewriter"
ones) which connected, I think, to "Scientific Time Sharing" (STSC?).

>
>
> Regards – Grant.
>

--
People in sleeping bags are the soft tacos of the bear world.
Maranatha! <><
John McKown

--
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: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread Mitch Mccluhan

 Hmmm, let me see if I remember.  Oh yeah, what used to be called a remote data 
center!
Mitch
 
 
-Original Message-
From: ITschak Mugzach 
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Tue, Jun 9, 2020 8:14 am
Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

John McKown, you are not alone!

ITschak Mugzach
*|** IronSphere Platform* *|* *Information Security Continuous Monitoring
for z/OS, x/Linux & IBM I **| z/VM comming son  *




On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 4:08 PM Ron Wells <
02ebc63ff5ef-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

> BINGO
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf
> Of Ward Able, Grant
> Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2020 7:56 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"
>
> ** EXTERNAL EMAIL - USE CAUTION **
>
>
> There's no such thing as The Cloud - it's just someone else's
> computer...
>
>
> Regards – Grant.
>
>
>
>
> DTCC Public (White)
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf
> Of Mitch Mccluhan
> Sent: 09 June 2020 13:51
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"
>
> ATTENTION: External Email – Be Suspicious of Attachments, Links and
> Requests for Login Information.
>
>  Everyone,
> I can tell you as a fact that there are a number of things are true.  Many
> "modernization" projects do end up not being completed, no big mainframe
> shop is looking to get off the mainframe, there are a large number of
> projects underway where the client is "modernizing" on the mainframe
> (language, file conversion, DBMS conversion, etc) and lastly (not a lot,
> but some) there are mainframe shops that are going to the zCloud which is
> essentially moving from one data center to another, keeping the mainframe.
> Anyone who tells you most (100%?, really?) mainframe users are going to
> distributed or distributed platform cloud are exaggerating the truth.  I
> know this because mainframe modernization is what I do for a living.
> Mitch
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Bob Bridges 
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Sent: Tue, Jun 9, 2020 7:02 am
> Subject: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"
>
> A coworker just sent me this brief article.
>
>
> https://nam05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.techrepublic.com%2Farticle%2Feveryone-wants-to-retire-mainframes-but-74-of-modernization-efforts-fail%2F=02%7C01%7CRon.Wells%40OMF.COM%7C725a6e6bbfc7491e27da08d80c746d3d%7C57c0053cb5f84a1e8bb6e8afa09f3b82%7C0%7C0%7C637273041502068880=x%2BEGwGWvVL%2F8lxapfBsYAjOcUtxZ3xmlb2rTqMoMeAE%3D=0
>
> I'm interested in two aspects of this:
>
> 1) The writer uses the word "modernization" quite a bit, and as far as I
> can tell she uses it, without explanation, to mean "switching from
> mainframes to more recently invented platforms".  This is the old
> assumption we've talked about recently.
>
> 2) There's a really surprising number in there:
>
> "...almost 100% of survey respondents plan to move legacy applications to
> the cloud this year and the motivation to move is clear:
>
> - 60% strongly agree they will be left behind competitively if they fail
> to modernize
> - 33% say modernizing has allowed the company to be more reactive to
> market changes
> - 34% say legacy modernization has accelerated digital transformation
> projects
>
> About three-quarters of leaders said they have started a modernization
> program but failed to complete it"
>
> Can that "almost 100%" claim be true?  I confess that three out of my last
> three clients are talking about eliminating the mainframe, but I supposed
> it to be an anomaly.  Maybe the survey used the word "modernize" and the
> author ~assumed~ this must mean dropping the mainframe.
>
> The article also says "Mainframes are still critical to business
> operations with 71% of the Fortune 500 depending on these machines,
> including 92 of the world's 100 largest banks".  Come on - she's telling us
> that almost ~all~ of those companies intend to switch legacy applications
> to the cloud?  I just can't buy that.  ~My~ bank had certainly better not
> be planning such a move.
>
> ---
> Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313
>
> /* If a problem has a single neck, it has a simple solution. */
>
> --
> 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 DTCC
> DISCLAIMER: This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential
> and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
> are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify us
> immediately and delete the email and any

Re: COBOL Question

Here's the question I have about Fortran support.  Why does IBM support modern 
Fortran on platforms like Linux and AIX, but mainframe Fortran (IBM VS FORTRAN) 
is still at FORTRAN 77 level and seems to have had no enhancements other than 
Language Environment support since...1993?  I know if I were a Fortran 
developer this would piss me off greatly.


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
Evans-Young, Darren 
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 8:16 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

FORTRAN 90 was a significant upgrade over previous standards. Mainly, free-form 
input source statements.
Also, increase the length of identifiers from 6 characters to 31 characters, 
and upper/lowecase keywords/identifiers.

The latest standard is Fortran 2018.

I still teach Fortran to my Honor students. It's easy to learn for a first 
programming language, very forgiving, and
you can do a lot with it. I still get flack from uninformed individuals, you 
know, the ones that say no one uses mainframes
anymore, no one uses Fortran anymore, no on uses COBOL anymore. Every year, a 
couple of my students email me back
to say how having Fortran experience on their resume helped them land a job or 
internship; companies like NASA, NOAA,
Lockheed-Martin, etc. They are usually the only applicants out of hundreds that 
list Fortran experience.

Darren


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
lenru...@gmail.com 
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 8:52 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

On, long ago and on some DOS/VS Cobol compiler, after a compiler upgrade, there 
was a problem with a statement something like this:
READ some-fileAT END do somethingMOVE A TO B.
See the problem?  The period after the AT END was omitted.  The old compiler 
only allowed one statement after AT END (maybe a bug) but after it honored the 
period.
It was a bear to find.  It worked before and for a long time after the compiler 
change, until it was complied again.
On Monday, June 8, 2020, 08:22:18 PM CDT, Frank Swarbrick 
 wrote:

 I've been teaching myself (modern) Fortran the last few weeks.  Just because.  
It has an interesting behavior that I kind of like.

Normal IF statement:

if (something) then
  
  
end if

But it also has a "one line IF" (not sure offhand of the Fortran "name" for 
this):

if (something) 

 must be on the same line as the if and the condition (unless 
you specify the "line continuation character"), and of course only one 
statement is allowed.  Kind of like the C/Java if statement with out a 
statement block, but less dangerous because of the "on the same line" 
requirement.  Here is one way I've used it in practice.

call get_command_argument(1, host)
if (inet_addr(host) .lt. 0) call error_stop("Host must be in dotted decimal 
format.")
call get_command_argument(2, port_str)
read (port_str, '(i5)', iostat = iostat) port ! convert string 'port_str' to 
integer 'port'
if (iostat .ne. 0 .or. port .le. 0) call error_stop("Port must be positive 
numeric (0-32767).")

Using "if/then" instead of just "if" I'd have had this:

call get_command_argument(1, host)
if (inet_addr(host) .lt. 0) then
call error_stop("Host must be in dotted decimal format.")
end if
call get_command_argument(2, port_str)
read (port_str, '(i5)', iostat = iostat) port ! convert string 'port_str' to 
integer 'port'
if (iostat .ne. 0 .or. port .le. 0) then
call error_stop("Port must be positive numeric (0-32767).")
end if

Given by absolute druthers I would have the then clause part of the single line 
if instead of the if/end if, but its still pretty nice regardless, as it 
doesn't cause as much "clutter" as error handling often does.

On a side note, I think Fortran has done a much better job than COBOL of adding 
"modern" features (starting with Fortran 90 in 1990).  If only the COBOL 
"designers" had followed in their footsteps.

And in my mind Fortran had even more to "make up" for in regards to it's less 
than ideal beginnings.  Which Fortran can even be forgiven for then, being I 
believe about five years older than COBOL (Cobol?).



From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of Bob 
Bridges 
Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:35 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

The only language I can think of off-hand that doesn't require some sort of END 
to close a DO (I'm sure there are others) is ISPF.  But, in REXX at least, I 
never use single-statement DOs.  I see them all the time, and I don't get it.  
Like this:

  if x=0 then do
x=x+1
  end

Or, more painfully:

  select
when idx="T" then
  do
countt=countt+1
  end
when idx="U" then
  do
countu=countu+1
  end
when idx="V" then
  do
countv=countv+1
  end
when idx="W" then
  do
countw=countw+1
  end
otherwise
  do

Re: [External] Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread Lionel B Dyck

Y'all stop using logic and reason - this is an emotional issue that the author 
and others are invested in and has nothing to do with IBM effectively telling 
the world that the mainframe is dead based on all the layoffs that have 
occurred over the last 20-25 years, or that IBM continues to offload software 
development or outright sells IBM software to other companies, or that IBM has 
bought into the Cloud and has reduced their investment in developing z/OS, or . 
. . .

And then there is the vast amounts of money to be made by replacing a mainframe 
- I'm sure that those vendors offering those services only have the best 
interests of the current mainframe users at heart.

It's Beta vs VHS all over again

Lionel B. Dyck <
Website: https://www.lbdsoftware.com

"Worry more about your character than your reputation.  Character is what you 
are, reputation merely what others think you are." - John Wooden

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Pommier, Rex
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:58 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: [External] Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

So does this mean that 2/3 of companies out there are running unsupported 
hardware and software?

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Raphaël Jacquot
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:48 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [External] Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

Le 09/06/2020 à 14:24, Peter Bishop a écrit :
> Interesting re 2):
> 
> "The survey found that organizations are running an average of four 
> mainframes with an average age of 17 years. Sixty-four percent are 
> running mainframes between 10 and 20 years old, with 28% running 
> machines that are 20 to 30 years old. "
> 
> So 2/7 are running machines over 20+ years old?  And 2/3 over 10 
> years? What does that even mean?  Smells fishy to me.  What is the 
> sample size?  Is it biased somehow?
> 
> Cheers,
> Peter

it does make sense if out of those 4 machines, they have older and newer 
boxes...

Raphael

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


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

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

Re: [External] Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

Is that like the eternal ax (that handle has been changed 20 times and the 
blade 30 times, but it's still the same ax)?

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

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Pommier, Rex [rpomm...@sfgmembers.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:59 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: [External] Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

Maybe based on their "logic", my z14 is 30 years old because we're running an 
application on it that was written in the late 80s.  Never mind that it has 
been maintained for the past 30+ years, since we can find 30 year old code in 
the application, the entire thing must be 30+ years old.

Rex

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Peter Bishop
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:24 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [External] Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

Interesting re 2):

"The survey found that organizations are running an average of four mainframes 
with an average age of 17 years. Sixty-four percent are running mainframes 
between 10 and 20 years old, with 28% running machines that are 20 to 30 years 
old. "

So 2/7 are running machines over 20+ years old?  And 2/3 over 10 years? What 
does that even mean?  Smells fishy to me.  What is the sample size?  Is it 
biased somehow?

Cheers,
Peter

On 9/06/2020 10:02 pm, Bob Bridges wrote:
> A coworker just sent me this brief article.
>
> https://secure-web.cisco.com/1JN9E1bGCX8mpl6qPkrSEev2O0fNt81naiQJbFUhhlGtqM9bJimsEWYFVu_WWDFv8b1LEShSbIYjTypvbccq0QTe8fSSnqtPTlIl5WSobiXufZ6TbWYqAd2zB6QnAJclJP_rAf4DgxXIypS7ymmvlkSe5TWlyy0y-0iLJVkpBun7o0cLqD4cYGunrKLpI9mR7jXtQTEW5mFdkn4ebl587wTx_Mz8k7HoG9dO1TptQ9A5akIhDp4Cvmz46L8Nvm7qca8D7I2KGd5alIDSNBefZDXYOIDnU14SegaPCQ5ON9WE8lD77ARJjrfke6SFteYf1D9CilsWGSdey--UR8R4B30tUGtIG2gflxGCGCckkwQdiMhCYFTxxVKpuXNl8glorWalBxAVso0bIdzEn7xAtz-0iemamNd1GxIAswPave4LokMoaE1c8NYBjr-kWaGaB/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.techrepublic.com%2Farticle%2Feveryone-wants-to-retire-mainfram
> es-but-74-of-modernization-efforts-fail/
>
> I'm interested in two aspects of this:
>
> 1) The writer uses the word "modernization" quite a bit, and as far as I can 
> tell she uses it, without explanation, to mean "switching from mainframes to 
> more recently invented platforms".  This is the old assumption we've talked 
> about recently.
>
> 2) There's a really surprising number in there:
>
> "...almost 100% of survey respondents plan to move legacy applications to the 
> cloud this year and the motivation to move is clear:
>
> - 60% strongly agree they will be left behind competitively if they
> fail to modernize
> - 33% say modernizing has allowed the company to be more reactive to
> market changes
> - 34% say legacy modernization has accelerated digital transformation
> projects
>
> About three-quarters of leaders said they have started a modernization 
> program but failed to complete it"
>
> Can that "almost 100%" claim be true?  I confess that three out of my last 
> three clients are talking about eliminating the mainframe, but I supposed it 
> to be an anomaly.  Maybe the survey used the word "modernize" and the author 
> ~assumed~ this must mean dropping the mainframe.
>
> The article also says "Mainframes are still critical to business operations 
> with 71% of the Fortune 500 depending on these machines, including 92 of the 
> world's 100 largest banks".  Come on - she's telling us that almost ~all~ of 
> those companies intend to switch legacy applications to the cloud?  I just 
> can't buy that.  ~My~ bank had certainly better not be planning such a move.
>
> ---
> Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313
>
> /* If a problem has a single neck, it has a simple solution. */
>
> --
> 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

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 /

Re: COBOL Question

Have they added array operations to Fortran?


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


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Bob 
Bridges [robhbrid...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:35 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

I haven't written anything in FORTRAN since some time in the late '70s.  But
even much more recently I heard it's regarded by number crunchers, engineers
say, as the best language for sheer speed.  Not so great for report writing
and formatting.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* If a problem has a single neck, it has a simple solution. */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Frank Swarbrick
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 21:22

I've been teaching myself (modern) Fortran the last few weeks.  Just
because.  It has an interesting behavior that I kind of like.

Normal IF statement:

if (something) then
   
   
end if

But it also has a "one line IF" (not sure offhand of the Fortran "name" for
this):

if (something) 

 must be on the same line as the if and the condition
(unless you specify the "line continuation character"), and of course only
one statement is allowed.  Kind of like the C/Java if statement with out a
statement block, but less dangerous because of the "on the same line"
requirement.  Here is one way I've used it in practice.

call get_command_argument(1, host)
if (inet_addr(host) .lt. 0) call error_stop("Host must be in dotted decimal
format.")
call get_command_argument(2, port_str)
read (port_str, '(i5)', iostat = iostat) port ! convert string 'port_str' to
integer 'port'
if (iostat .ne. 0 .or. port .le. 0) call error_stop("Port must be positive
numeric (0-32767).")

Using "if/then" instead of just "if" I'd have had this:

call get_command_argument(1, host)
if (inet_addr(host) .lt. 0) then
call error_stop("Host must be in dotted decimal format.")
end if
call get_command_argument(2, port_str)
read (port_str, '(i5)', iostat = iostat) port ! convert string 'port_str' to
integer 'port'
if (iostat .ne. 0 .or. port .le. 0) then
call error_stop("Port must be positive numeric (0-32767).")
end if

Given by absolute druthers I would have the then clause part of the single
line if instead of the if/end if, but its still pretty nice regardless, as
it doesn't cause as much "clutter" as error handling often does.

On a side note, I think Fortran has done a much better job than COBOL of
adding "modern" features (starting with Fortran 90 in 1990).  If only the
COBOL "designers" had followed in their footsteps.

And in my mind Fortran had even more to "make up" for in regards to it's
less than ideal beginnings.  Which Fortran can even be forgiven for then,
being I believe about five years older than COBOL (Cobol?).


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of
Bob Bridges 
Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:35 PM

The only language I can think of off-hand that doesn't require some sort of
END to close a DO (I'm sure there are others) is ISPF.  But, in REXX at
least, I never use single-statement DOs.  I see them all the time, and I
don't get it.  Like this:

  if x=0 then do
x=x+1
  end

Or, more painfully:

  select
when idx="T" then
  do
countt=countt+1
  end
when idx="U" then
  do
countu=countu+1
  end
when idx="V" then
  do
countv=countv+1
  end
when idx="W" then
  do
countw=countw+1
  end
otherwise
  do
countx=countx+1
  end
  end

Why?  If it were easier to read, I might sympathize.  But it's harder, not
easier.

--
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: COBOL Question

A noted translator once claimed that every translation is a lie; I am tempted 
to claim that every computer-related taxonomy is a lie.

Octal was the norm long before EUnix; hexadecimal, while occasionally used, was 
an aberration until S/360.

By 1960 macro-assemblers were the norm.

How do you classify Prolog? RPG.?

Do you really want, e.g., Ada, ALGOL 68, APL, Erlang, FLOW-MATIC, FORMAC, 
Forth, FORTRAN, Go, Haskell, Icon, LISP, PL/I, Prolog, RPG, Simula, SNOBOL, in 
the same generation?

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

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Bob 
Bridges [robhbrid...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:49 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question

LOL!  I'm reminded that DYL-280II was advertised as a 4GL, with English-like 
syntax.  Neither is true, to my mind.  I like DYL-280II, and taught classes in 
it at my employer of the time (Volvo Truck NA) as well as workshops at the 
DYLAKOR conferences.  But it's not a 4GL.

Well, not in the sense I usually associate with the term.

Actually, let me ask the group what you think about that:

1GL: Machine code; programming in binary and hex.  (Also octal, if you think in 
Unix, I suppose, which I don't.)

2GL: Assemblers of various flavors; each statement in assembler corresponds to 
a single machine instruction, but using mnemonics that make it easier to 
remember how to say what you intend.

3GL: Algorithmic languages.  Most of us use these: COBOL, FORTRAN, BASIC, VB, 
Pascal, you get the idea.  The feature of algorithmic languages is that they 
have a certain severe syntax, each token meaning a very particular thing, but 
arranged in a way that allows a human to clump several machine instructions 
together into conceptual groups.  Calls to a subroutine can be expressed in one 
line rather than five; assignment statements the same.

4GL: This was supposed to be the point at which we could just talk to a 
computer and let it would figure out what we mean.  I gather there've been some 
attempts at this that generate surprisingly good results - with surprising gaps 
in the system's ability to comprehend how we think.  Yeah, yeah, I realize what 
that really means is that ~we~ often fail to notice how we think.  But we don't 
really have a 4GL by this definition...do we?  Still a dream, I gather.

Not that I'm complaining.  It may be a dream that can never be realized, simply 
because human thoughts are imprecise and cannot be acted upon precisely until 
the human has organized them better.  Using a 3GL is one way to force that 
organization.

Just a thought.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* I never noticed them actually using English words in the finals of the 
spelling bee.  They seem to have reached a point where the spellers can spell 
all the English words and have moved on to words from around the world that may 
once have been used in an English sentence.  -Dogsbody at Norton's Patrick 
O'Brian forum */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 22:19

It's so nice of COBOL to be written in common language so
any English speaker can intuitively grasp it correctly.

--- On Mon, 8 Jun 2020 20:50:12 -0500, Joe Monk wrote:
>In this case, because we are PERFORMing THRU, then GO TO exit, merely
>causes an iterate.
>
>--- On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 7:36 PM Frank Swarbrick wrote:
>> GO TO to an "exit" procedure (that is, a procedure that terminates
>> unconditionally terminates the program) is, in my mind, acceptable as
>> well.  In fact, if you try to "perform" a "terminal" exit procedure the
>> compiler will give you a warning that your "calling" procedure will never
>> reach its exit.

--
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: [External] Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread Pommier, Rex

Maybe based on their "logic", my z14 is 30 years old because we're running an 
application on it that was written in the late 80s.  Never mind that it has 
been maintained for the past 30+ years, since we can find 30 year old code in 
the application, the entire thing must be 30+ years old.

Rex

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Peter Bishop
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:24 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [External] Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

Interesting re 2):

"The survey found that organizations are running an average of four mainframes 
with an average age of 17 years. Sixty-four percent are running mainframes 
between 10 and 20 years old, with 28% running machines that are 20 to 30 years 
old. "

So 2/7 are running machines over 20+ years old?  And 2/3 over 10 years? What 
does that even mean?  Smells fishy to me.  What is the sample size?  Is it 
biased somehow?

Cheers,
Peter

On 9/06/2020 10:02 pm, Bob Bridges wrote:
> A coworker just sent me this brief article.
>
> https://www.techrepublic.com/article/everyone-wants-to-retire-mainfram
> es-but-74-of-modernization-efforts-fail/
>
> I'm interested in two aspects of this:
>
> 1) The writer uses the word "modernization" quite a bit, and as far as I can 
> tell she uses it, without explanation, to mean "switching from mainframes to 
> more recently invented platforms".  This is the old assumption we've talked 
> about recently.
>
> 2) There's a really surprising number in there:
>
> "...almost 100% of survey respondents plan to move legacy applications to the 
> cloud this year and the motivation to move is clear:
>
> - 60% strongly agree they will be left behind competitively if they 
> fail to modernize
> - 33% say modernizing has allowed the company to be more reactive to 
> market changes
> - 34% say legacy modernization has accelerated digital transformation 
> projects
>
> About three-quarters of leaders said they have started a modernization 
> program but failed to complete it"
>
> Can that "almost 100%" claim be true?  I confess that three out of my last 
> three clients are talking about eliminating the mainframe, but I supposed it 
> to be an anomaly.  Maybe the survey used the word "modernize" and the author 
> ~assumed~ this must mean dropping the mainframe.
>
> The article also says "Mainframes are still critical to business operations 
> with 71% of the Fortune 500 depending on these machines, including 92 of the 
> world's 100 largest banks".  Come on - she's telling us that almost ~all~ of 
> those companies intend to switch legacy applications to the cloud?  I just 
> can't buy that.  ~My~ bank had certainly better not be planning such a move.
>
> ---
> Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313
>
> /* If a problem has a single neck, it has a simple solution. */
>
> --
> 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

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

Re: [External] Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread Pommier, Rex

So does this mean that 2/3 of companies out there are running unsupported 
hardware and software?

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Raphaël Jacquot
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:48 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [External] Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

Le 09/06/2020 à 14:24, Peter Bishop a écrit :
> Interesting re 2):
> 
> "The survey found that organizations are running an average of four 
> mainframes with an average age of 17 years. Sixty-four percent are 
> running mainframes between 10 and 20 years old, with 28% running 
> machines that are 20 to 30 years old. "
> 
> So 2/7 are running machines over 20+ years old?  And 2/3 over 10 
> years? What does that even mean?  Smells fishy to me.  What is the 
> sample size?  Is it biased somehow?
> 
> Cheers,
> Peter

it does make sense if out of those 4 machines, they have older and newer 
boxes...

Raphael

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

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

Re: AZD messages?

2020-06-09 Thread Sean Gleann

Mike
I can see I left out details that would have made things a bit easier to
understand - Please accept my apologies.
Having said that, the first draft of a response to the points you raise
included a _lot_ of information, and I eventually threw that draft away.
Please understand that I'm not trying to be secretive - I'm just trying to
avoid a 'TL/DR' response.
My use of localhost is Ok in the environment I'm in. I can use that or the
DNS name, or the IPaddress - they are all practically interchangeable for
my purposes.
Note the word 'practically' there, though. If I use DNS or IPAddr to get to
z/OSMF, I get a security warning in the browser window which I have to
respond to before getting to the logon screen.
If I use localhost, that warning does not appear, so really it's just a way
of saving a (small) amount of time.

Your later comments about the z/OSMF server certificate coincided with my
recognition of the significance of the KEYRING_NAME parm in IZUPRMxx.
My only prior use of z/OSMF was to use the Configuration Assistant to
create the config files necessary for implementing AT-TLS on the system.
After a few false starts (it was my _very_ first use of z/OSMF) everything
went fine, and there were no instances of z/OSMF wanting to use the REST
API to get information from somewhere else, so no 'connection refused'
problem occurred.
I've never modified and used the supplied IZUSEC job because I haven't
needed to. Everything was previously done by the team that created our z/OS
system in the first place - or so I thought.
With this current use of z/OSMF, the use of a server certificate has raised
its head.
Now it would appear that I've got to put some work in on that front; to
make sure all the RACF permissions are in place and so on.

But I'm a bit confused. On the one hand I can see the need for the
correct definition and handling of the server certificate, but APAR PH10056
says (in part):

The z/OSMF server port uses Java SSL encryption to protect its
outbound HTTPS connections. Therefore, it is not necessary (or
possible) to configure AT-TLS on the z/OSMF server port. If you
attempt to do so, the z/OSMF server will encounter HTTP connection
failures and errors, such as the following, in the server logs
directory:
1.  IZUG476E: The HTTP request to the secondary z/OSMF instance "209"
failed with error type "CertificateError" and response code "0"
2.  javax.net.ssl.SSLException: Unrecognized SSL message, plaintext 
connection?

That second error message is exactly the one I'm seeing in the server log
at the time the 'connection refused' error occurs.

So right now I'm at a bit of a loss when it comes to reconciling the
apparent contradiction here. As I say, I've never touched the IZUSEC job it
appears but it _has_ been used and is now interfering with z/OSMF's
activities.
I _have_ introduced AT-TLS on the system, but that is restricted to
controlling TN3270 and SFTP work - there's no mention of port 10443 or
stuff associated with z/OSMF in the AT-TLS config files.
I 've obviously got some more digging to do...

Regards
Sean

On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 at 07:43, Sean Gleann  wrote:

> Thank you Dave - I was unaware of that qualification.
> Checked and, yes, 'localhost' is defined in my RESOLVER parameters
>
> Sean
>
>
> On Mon, 8 Jun 2020 at 17:33, Mike Wawiorko <
> 014ab5cdfb21-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>
>> I hope I'm understanding what you are saying.
>>
>> Localhost is for use ONLY within a single TCPIP stack or system. It is
>> another way of writing non-routable IP address '127.0.0.1'.
>> Maybe configuring host files will allow you to do this but that will be
>> very confusing and awkward to support.
>>
>> You should NOT be using localhost to get from your device (PC or
>> whatever) to the z/OS TCPIP stack.
>>
>> You should configure a name for your ZOSMF IP address.
>> If you always run ZOSMF on the same z/OS system you may already have a
>> suitable name in DNS for the system's static VIPA.
>> If you move ZOSMF between systems in the sysplex you will need a Dynamic
>> Virtual IP Address (DVIPA) and an entry in DNS (or host files) for it.
>>
>> I'm struggling to follow what you are saying about PuTTY for SSH and your
>> Opera browser.
>>
>> You might use your SSH connection to get to z/OS and work with USS and
>> perform some configuration actions. You do not use PuTTY to logon to ZOSMF.
>>
>> You should have a ZOSMF server certificate signed by a CA trusted by your
>> browser.
>> This certificate should - probably must - include the DNS name as a
>> subject alternate name.
>>
>> When you make the HTTPS connection from the browser Opera will validate
>> the security of the connection. That will include:
>> 1. Check that it is indeed HTTPS and not HTTP
>> 2. Check for TLS1.2 - lower levels of SSL / TLS are often not allowed
>> these days
>> 3. Check the ZOSMF server certificate Is signed by a CA trusted by Opera
>> 4. Check certificate dates
>> 5. Confirm the DNS you used to

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread Bill Giannelli

I think to most here the argument against mainframes from a technical point of 
view is wrong. But I wondering if another aspect has to be looked at. That is 
IBM's sales, licensing  and promotion of their technology. I realize all this 
is old news. But lack of promotion (compared to other companies) and lack of 
development of new talent in younger generations..

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

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread Carmen Vitullo

This is funny and sad at the same time; 
my company went as far as creating a new group 'Virtualization technology' 
dedicated to 'CLOUD' computing, when I told my director that we, on the 
mainframe with some work can create a Zcloud instance or instances using z/osmf 
- he was surprised, but did not embrace the fact Z can participate in could 
computing. 
like anything else, the decisions on what technology, and what tools we use, 
even on the mainframe are being decided by folks that do not have a clue and do 
not engage my group at all. 
sad very sad 


Carmen Vitullo 

- Original Message -

From: "Bill Giannelli"  
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:15:02 AM 
Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes" 

this just upsets me in so many ways. 
The ignorance is amazing. 
I happen to be at a shop where aws is the current sexy flavor of the day. 
the mainframes at my shop have there days numbered for very invalid and naive 
reasons. 

-- 
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: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 7:56 AM Ward Able, Grant  wrote:

> There's no such thing as The Cloud - it's just someone else's
> computer...
>

And it's just a re-invention of "time sharing". Well, except that each
client has its own set of virtual machines (maybe real machines, but I
doubt it) with their data on one or more SAN disks (LUNs?). I remember that
from the 1970s (not sure about the date). I do remember the college where I
went (U.T. Arlington) had a few terminals (the IBM "selectric typewriter"
ones) which connected, I think, to "Scientific Time Sharing" (STSC?).

>
>
> Regards – Grant.
>

-- 
People in sleeping bags are the soft tacos of the bear world.
Maranatha! <><
John McKown

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

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread Dana Mitchell

On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 12:49:53 +, Seymour J Metz  wrote:
>
> "The survey found that organizations are running an average of four
> mainframes with an average age of 17 years. Sixty-four percent are
> running mainframes between 10 and 20 years old, with 28% running
> machines that are 20 to 30 years old."
>
>I don't find that plausible.
>

I also find this very  hard to believe.  *average* 17 years old?   Current 
machines available in 2003 could be anything from CMOS G5  to z900 G2,  not 
even considering what release of z/OS would be supported on them.  Obviously 
none of these sites are financial institutions that have to be PCI and SOX 
compliant.
Dana

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

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread Bill Giannelli

this just upsets me in so many ways.
The ignorance is amazing.
I happen to be at a shop where aws is the current sexy flavor of the day.
the mainframes at my shop have there days numbered for very invalid and naive 
reasons.

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

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread ITschak Mugzach

John McKown, you are not alone!

ITschak Mugzach
*|** IronSphere Platform* *|* *Information Security Continuous Monitoring
for z/OS, x/Linux & IBM I **| z/VM comming son  *




On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 4:08 PM Ron Wells <
02ebc63ff5ef-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

> BINGO
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf
> Of Ward Able, Grant
> Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2020 7:56 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"
>
> ** EXTERNAL EMAIL - USE CAUTION **
>
>
> There's no such thing as The Cloud - it's just someone else's
> computer...
>
>
> Regards – Grant.
>
>
>
>
> DTCC Public (White)
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf
> Of Mitch Mccluhan
> Sent: 09 June 2020 13:51
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"
>
> ATTENTION: External Email – Be Suspicious of Attachments, Links and
> Requests for Login Information.
>
>  Everyone,
> I can tell you as a fact that there are a number of things are true.  Many
> "modernization" projects do end up not being completed, no big mainframe
> shop is looking to get off the mainframe, there are a large number of
> projects underway where the client is "modernizing" on the mainframe
> (language, file conversion, DBMS conversion, etc) and lastly (not a lot,
> but some) there are mainframe shops that are going to the zCloud which is
> essentially moving from one data center to another, keeping the mainframe.
> Anyone who tells you most (100%?, really?) mainframe users are going to
> distributed or distributed platform cloud are exaggerating the truth.  I
> know this because mainframe modernization is what I do for a living.
> Mitch
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Bob Bridges 
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Sent: Tue, Jun 9, 2020 7:02 am
> Subject: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"
>
> A coworker just sent me this brief article.
>
>
> https://nam05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.techrepublic.com%2Farticle%2Feveryone-wants-to-retire-mainframes-but-74-of-modernization-efforts-fail%2Fdata=02%7C01%7CRon.Wells%40OMF.COM%7C725a6e6bbfc7491e27da08d80c746d3d%7C57c0053cb5f84a1e8bb6e8afa09f3b82%7C0%7C0%7C637273041502068880sdata=x%2BEGwGWvVL%2F8lxapfBsYAjOcUtxZ3xmlb2rTqMoMeAE%3Dreserved=0
>
> I'm interested in two aspects of this:
>
> 1) The writer uses the word "modernization" quite a bit, and as far as I
> can tell she uses it, without explanation, to mean "switching from
> mainframes to more recently invented platforms".  This is the old
> assumption we've talked about recently.
>
> 2) There's a really surprising number in there:
>
> "...almost 100% of survey respondents plan to move legacy applications to
> the cloud this year and the motivation to move is clear:
>
> - 60% strongly agree they will be left behind competitively if they fail
> to modernize
> - 33% say modernizing has allowed the company to be more reactive to
> market changes
> - 34% say legacy modernization has accelerated digital transformation
> projects
>
> About three-quarters of leaders said they have started a modernization
> program but failed to complete it"
>
> Can that "almost 100%" claim be true?  I confess that three out of my last
> three clients are talking about eliminating the mainframe, but I supposed
> it to be an anomaly.  Maybe the survey used the word "modernize" and the
> author ~assumed~ this must mean dropping the mainframe.
>
> The article also says "Mainframes are still critical to business
> operations with 71% of the Fortune 500 depending on these machines,
> including 92 of the world's 100 largest banks".  Come on - she's telling us
> that almost ~all~ of those companies intend to switch legacy applications
> to the cloud?  I just can't buy that.  ~My~ bank had certainly better not
> be planning such a move.
>
> ---
> Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313
>
> /* If a problem has a single neck, it has a simple solution. */
>
> --
> 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 DTCC
> DISCLAIMER: This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential
> and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
> are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify us
> immediately and delete the email and any attachments from your system. The
> recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of
> viruses. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any
> virus transmitted by this email.
>
>
>

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread Ron Wells

BINGO

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Ward Able, Grant
Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2020 7:56 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

** EXTERNAL EMAIL - USE CAUTION **

There's no such thing as The Cloud - it's just someone else's computer...

Regards – Grant.

DTCC Public (White)

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Mitch Mccluhan
Sent: 09 June 2020 13:51
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

ATTENTION: External Email – Be Suspicious of Attachments, Links and Requests 
for Login Information.

 Everyone,
I can tell you as a fact that there are a number of things are true.  Many 
"modernization" projects do end up not being completed, no big mainframe shop 
is looking to get off the mainframe, there are a large number of projects 
underway where the client is "modernizing" on the mainframe (language, file 
conversion, DBMS conversion, etc) and lastly (not a lot, but some) there are 
mainframe shops that are going to the zCloud which is essentially moving from 
one data center to another, keeping the mainframe.
Anyone who tells you most (100%?, really?) mainframe users are going to 
distributed or distributed platform cloud are exaggerating the truth.  I know 
this because mainframe modernization is what I do for a living.
Mitch

-Original Message-
From: Bob Bridges 
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Tue, Jun 9, 2020 7:02 am
Subject: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

A coworker just sent me this brief article.

https://nam05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.techrepublic.com%2Farticle%2Feveryone-wants-to-retire-mainframes-but-74-of-modernization-efforts-fail%2Fdata=02%7C01%7CRon.Wells%40OMF.COM%7C725a6e6bbfc7491e27da08d80c746d3d%7C57c0053cb5f84a1e8bb6e8afa09f3b82%7C0%7C0%7C637273041502068880sdata=x%2BEGwGWvVL%2F8lxapfBsYAjOcUtxZ3xmlb2rTqMoMeAE%3Dreserved=0

I'm interested in two aspects of this:

1) The writer uses the word "modernization" quite a bit, and as far as I can 
tell she uses it, without explanation, to mean "switching from mainframes to 
more recently invented platforms".  This is the old assumption we've talked 
about recently.

2) There's a really surprising number in there:

"...almost 100% of survey respondents plan to move legacy applications to the 
cloud this year and the motivation to move is clear:

- 60% strongly agree they will be left behind competitively if they fail to 
modernize
- 33% say modernizing has allowed the company to be more reactive to market 
changes
- 34% say legacy modernization has accelerated digital transformation projects

About three-quarters of leaders said they have started a modernization program 
but failed to complete it"

Can that "almost 100%" claim be true?  I confess that three out of my last 
three clients are talking about eliminating the mainframe, but I supposed it to 
be an anomaly.  Maybe the survey used the word "modernize" and the author 
~assumed~ this must mean dropping the mainframe.

The article also says "Mainframes are still critical to business operations 
with 71% of the Fortune 500 depending on these machines, including 92 of the 
world's 100 largest banks".  Come on - she's telling us that almost ~all~ of 
those companies intend to switch legacy applications to the cloud?  I just 
can't buy that.  ~My~ bank had certainly better not be planning such a move.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* If a problem has a single neck, it has a simple solution. */

--
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 DTCC DISCLAIMER: This 
email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely 
for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have 
received this email in error, please notify us immediately and delete the email 
and any attachments from your system. The recipient should check this email and 
any attachments for the presence of viruses. The company accepts no liability 
for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.

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

Email Disclaimer

This E-mail contains confidential information belonging to the sender, which 
may be legally privileged information. This information is intended only for 
the use of the individual or entity addressed above. If you are not the

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread Ward Able, Grant

There's no such thing as The Cloud - it's just someone else's computer...


Regards – Grant.




DTCC Public (White)

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Mitch Mccluhan
Sent: 09 June 2020 13:51
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

ATTENTION: External Email – Be Suspicious of Attachments, Links and Requests 
for Login Information.

 Everyone,
I can tell you as a fact that there are a number of things are true.  Many 
"modernization" projects do end up not being completed, no big mainframe shop 
is looking to get off the mainframe, there are a large number of projects 
underway where the client is "modernizing" on the mainframe (language, file 
conversion, DBMS conversion, etc) and lastly (not a lot, but some) there are 
mainframe shops that are going to the zCloud which is essentially moving from 
one data center to another, keeping the mainframe.
Anyone who tells you most (100%?, really?) mainframe users are going to 
distributed or distributed platform cloud are exaggerating the truth.  I know 
this because mainframe modernization is what I do for a living.
Mitch


-Original Message-
From: Bob Bridges 
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Tue, Jun 9, 2020 7:02 am
Subject: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

A coworker just sent me this brief article.

https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.techrepublic.com%2Farticle%2Feveryone-wants-to-retire-mainframes-but-74-of-modernization-efforts-fail%2Fdata=02%7C01%7Cgwardable%40DTCC.COM%7Cfe5df2a430cb4910820008d80c73d5bb%7C0465519d7f554d47998b55e2a86f04a8%7C0%7C1%7C637273038932904759sdata=ZxLg5w7uOZfrziPaK5scu%2BrGvGtTSjxkIafKyfwlvfE%3Dreserved=0

I'm interested in two aspects of this:

1) The writer uses the word "modernization" quite a bit, and as far as I can 
tell she uses it, without explanation, to mean "switching from mainframes to 
more recently invented platforms".  This is the old assumption we've talked 
about recently.

2) There's a really surprising number in there:

"...almost 100% of survey respondents plan to move legacy applications to the 
cloud this year and the motivation to move is clear:

- 60% strongly agree they will be left behind competitively if they fail to 
modernize
- 33% say modernizing has allowed the company to be more reactive to market 
changes
- 34% say legacy modernization has accelerated digital transformation projects

About three-quarters of leaders said they have started a modernization program 
but failed to complete it"

Can that "almost 100%" claim be true?  I confess that three out of my last 
three clients are talking about eliminating the mainframe, but I supposed it to 
be an anomaly.  Maybe the survey used the word "modernize" and the author 
~assumed~ this must mean dropping the mainframe.

The article also says "Mainframes are still critical to business operations 
with 71% of the Fortune 500 depending on these machines, including 92 of the 
world's 100 largest banks".  Come on - she's telling us that almost ~all~ of 
those companies intend to switch legacy applications to the cloud?  I just 
can't buy that.  ~My~ bank had certainly better not be planning such a move.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* If a problem has a single neck, it has a simple solution. */

--
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
DTCC DISCLAIMER: This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential 
and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are 
addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify us 
immediately and delete the email and any attachments from your system. The 
recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of 
viruses. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus 
transmitted by this email.


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

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread Mitch Mccluhan

 Everyone,
I can tell you as a fact that there are a number of things are true.  Many 
"modernization" projects do end up not being completed, no big mainframe shop 
is looking to get off the mainframe, there are a large number of projects 
underway where the client is "modernizing" on the mainframe (language, file 
conversion, DBMS conversion, etc) and lastly (not a lot, but some) there are 
mainframe shops that are going to the zCloud which is essentially moving from 
one data center to another, keeping the mainframe.
Anyone who tells you most (100%?, really?) mainframe users are going to 
distributed or distributed platform cloud are exaggerating the truth.  I know 
this because mainframe modernization is what I do for a living.
Mitch
 
 
-Original Message-
From: Bob Bridges 
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Tue, Jun 9, 2020 7:02 am
Subject: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

A coworker just sent me this brief article.

https://www.techrepublic.com/article/everyone-wants-to-retire-mainframes-but-74-of-modernization-efforts-fail/

I'm interested in two aspects of this:

1) The writer uses the word "modernization" quite a bit, and as far as I can 
tell she uses it, without explanation, to mean "switching from mainframes to 
more recently invented platforms".  This is the old assumption we've talked 
about recently.

2) There's a really surprising number in there:

"...almost 100% of survey respondents plan to move legacy applications to the 
cloud this year and the motivation to move is clear:

- 60% strongly agree they will be left behind competitively if they fail to 
modernize
- 33% say modernizing has allowed the company to be more reactive to market 
changes
- 34% say legacy modernization has accelerated digital transformation projects 

About three-quarters of leaders said they have started a modernization program 
but failed to complete it"

Can that "almost 100%" claim be true?  I confess that three out of my last 
three clients are talking about eliminating the mainframe, but I supposed it to 
be an anomaly.  Maybe the survey used the word "modernize" and the author 
~assumed~ this must mean dropping the mainframe.

The article also says "Mainframes are still critical to business operations 
with 71% of the Fortune 500 depending on these machines, including 92 of the 
world's 100 largest banks".  Come on - she's telling us that almost ~all~ of 
those companies intend to switch legacy applications to the cloud?  I just 
can't buy that.  ~My~ bank had certainly better not be planning such a move.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* If a problem has a single neck, it has a simple solution. */

--
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: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread Mike Wawiorko

Bet many were 30 year old 4381s, 3081s or whatever running MVS prior to XA. 
Depends who you ask. Application base code may not have changed much. I'd hope 
front-ends are no longer subarea SNA! 

Many hardware and software upgrades later we have modernised the mainframe. 

Didn't MVS address spaces invent the 'Cloud'?

For what mainframes do well, try doing it better AND cheaper in the 'Cloud'. 

Same as the 30-50 year old spade with 3 new blades and 10 new handles.

Mike Wawiorko   

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Peter Bishop
Sent: 09 June 2020 13:24
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"


This mail originated from outside our organisation - p.bis...@computer.org

Interesting re 2):

"The survey found that organizations are running an average of four mainframes 
with an average age of 17 years. Sixty-four percent are running mainframes 
between 10 and 20 years old, with 28% running machines that are 20 to 30 years 
old. "

So 2/7 are running machines over 20+ years old?  And 2/3 over 10 years? What 
does that even mean?  Smells fishy to me.  What is the sample size?  Is it 
biased somehow?

Cheers,
Peter


This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and intended solely for the 
addressee and may also be privileged or exempt from disclosure under applicable 
law. If you are not the addressee, or have received this e-mail in error, 
please notify the sender immediately, delete it from your system and do not 
copy, disclose or otherwise act upon any part of this e-mail or its attachments.
Internet communications are not guaranteed to be secure or virus-free. The 
Barclays Group does not accept responsibility for any loss arising from 
unauthorised access to, or interference with, any Internet communications by 
any third party, or from the transmission of any viruses. Replies to this 
e-mail may be monitored by the Barclays Group for operational or business 
reasons.
Any opinion or other information in this e-mail or its attachments that does 
not relate to the business of the Barclays Group is personal to the sender and 
is not given or endorsed by the Barclays Group.
Barclays Execution Services Limited provides support and administrative 
services across Barclays group. Barclays Execution Services Limited is an 
appointed representative of Barclays Bank UK plc, Barclays Bank plc and 
Clydesdale Financial Services Limited. Barclays Bank UK plc and Barclays Bank 
plc are authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the 
Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority. Clydesdale 
Financial Services Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct 
Authority.

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

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

I suspect that "modernization" means using what is in style and that the 100% 
is because of a tailored audience. The "fear of change" survey seems to be more 
about perceptions than objective reality. Then there':s this: 

 "The survey found that organizations are running an average of four
 mainframes with an average age of 17 years. Sixty-four percent are
 running mainframes between 10 and 20 years old, with 28% running
 machines that are 20 to 30 years old."

I don't find that plausible.



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


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Bob 
Bridges [robhbrid...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:02 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

A coworker just sent me this brief article.

https://secure-web.cisco.com/14-WFIR1qBZCPuzn3LqYDmZXYM30fIjsT2MnewE60Th_hg2gOvsS42TRp3CAdodmUvSgJD1oBg83FNFvZHHMQKwFU3OGy_6c0F8mcjbiPnV_WIXOEY91LV0fEy2WxY8iEa6lxD7Vvv0V4nEoaOJsYkk4hMUnnm2pe4Qm-_Y4qRk32esZBtNHCv9c4ZOCQspwZ1QTj9fvWTglYYj2jEl1v4iTFerOlmT2tMCbrMfC_ojW1YvFd-0XN4vzfFFwI2zb50IItjW4-vzfJroGRDGu8x43dFNqzn9onwZdAgRzHD3BJKs4CNY5LOSmS67YM22wAb2QRKB3nB9RIUAbuKOByzJatYZofnptjQxip-LBfe9ZwmeOyyKZzQj0-gARidYzdIM7iPWmZVve0e3COSbrAfDgHb8ONMMdQjCWtcPnnlzM22I8hMeFyJF18vJg_rVDC/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.techrepublic.com%2Farticle%2Feveryone-wants-to-retire-mainframes-but-74-of-modernization-efforts-fail%2F

I'm interested in two aspects of this:

1) The writer uses the word "modernization" quite a bit, and as far as I can 
tell she uses it, without explanation, to mean "switching from mainframes to 
more recently invented platforms".  This is the old assumption we've talked 
about recently.

2) There's a really surprising number in there:

"...almost 100% of survey respondents plan to move legacy applications to the 
cloud this year and the motivation to move is clear:

- 60% strongly agree they will be left behind competitively if they fail to 
modernize
- 33% say modernizing has allowed the company to be more reactive to market 
changes
- 34% say legacy modernization has accelerated digital transformation projects

About three-quarters of leaders said they have started a modernization program 
but failed to complete it"

Can that "almost 100%" claim be true?  I confess that three out of my last 
three clients are talking about eliminating the mainframe, but I supposed it to 
be an anomaly.  Maybe the survey used the word "modernize" and the author 
~assumed~ this must mean dropping the mainframe.

The article also says "Mainframes are still critical to business operations 
with 71% of the Fortune 500 depending on these machines, including 92 of the 
world's 100 largest banks".  Come on - she's telling us that almost ~all~ of 
those companies intend to switch legacy applications to the cloud?  I just 
can't buy that.  ~My~ bank had certainly better not be planning such a move.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* If a problem has a single neck, it has a simple solution. */

--
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: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread Raphaël Jacquot

Le 09/06/2020 à 14:24, Peter Bishop a écrit :
> Interesting re 2):
> 
> "The survey found that organizations are running an average of four
> mainframes with an average age of 17 years. Sixty-four percent are
> running mainframes between 10 and 20 years old, with 28% running
> machines that are 20 to 30 years old. "
> 
> So 2/7 are running machines over 20+ years old?  And 2/3 over 10 years? 
> What does that even mean?  Smells fishy to me.  What is the sample
> size?  Is it biased somehow?
> 
> Cheers,
> Peter

it does make sense if out of those 4 machines, they have older and newer
boxes...

Raphael

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

Re: Goto Statements AND COBOL OPTIMIZATION (was: COBOL Question)

2020-06-09 Thread Clark Morris

[Default] On 8 Jun 2020 01:55:52 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
dcrayf...@gmail.com (David Crayford) wrote:

>I learned JSP back in the early 90's. It was popular in the UK (Jackson 
>was British) and most large mainframe companies adopted it. It was good. 
>There was even tooling that
>could create code from charts.
>
>Dijkstra's paper is one of the most controversial CS papers ever 
>written. It was written before structured programming took off and 
>programming languages
>like FORTRAN and COBOL were not well structured at the time. 
>Unfortunately, people drank the kool-aid and a whole generation of 
>programmers were brain-washed by dogma
>that goto is inherently evil. I see code all the time that eschews goto 
>for error handling and the alternative is never better. In fact, it's 
>always crap! It's either deeply nested if-logic or extra status
>flag checks. For languages that support try/finally, use groups, RAII 
>etc the problem doesn't exist but that's certainly not the case from 
>almost all mainstream languages that run on z/OS
>other than Java and C++.
>
My avoidance of GO TO in COBOL is based on my understanding of IBM
COBOL compiler optimization and not a computer theology that says all
GO TO is bad.  In the case of error clean up and blow up paragraphs,
from a clarity point of view I would prefer to GO TO them but I
believe this could adversely affect optimization.

While I can't speak for other languages, VS COBOL 2.4 and later
optimizations Enterprise COBOL 5.2 do PERFORM optimization where
Paragraphs that can only be PERFORMed will cause a simplified
generation of code for the related PERFORMs. In some cases the
Paragraph is moved inline to replace the PERFORM statement which can
bee a performance advantage for caching.  I don't believe that PERFORM
... THRU statements are eligible for this optimization.  I have
avoided GO TO statements and even used PERFORM to execute the error
abort Paragraphs accepting the warning message to make certain the
optimization could take place.  This is because in COBOL the same
paragraph could be reached by PERFORM x, PERFORM x THRU exit-x1,
PERFORM x THRU exit-x2 and GO TO x.  The addition of EXIT PARAGRAPH
and EXIT SECTION have eliminated most of the reasons for use of GO TO
in COBOL.  I would be interested in any corrections to my
understanding by those responsible for the COBOL compiler.  

Clark Morris
>
>On 2020-06-08 4:28 PM, Wayne Bickerdike wrote:
>> Dijkstra wrote his missive around 1968. Knuth made a meal of it and after
>> reading his paper which was published 5 years later, it was too hard a read.
>>
>> Around the same time Michael Jackson was distilling this information and
>> produced his structured programming book "Principles of Program Design". I
>> still have a copy and generally will approach program design using the same
>> tried and tested techniques. At IBM in 1978 we had an advocate for the same
>> methods, Tony Droar. Unfortunately, a lot of this good work seemed to miss
>> a lot of organisations. Some places I worked in the 80's wouldn't allow a
>> sort to make a program easier to write.
>>
>> Jackson explained go to was essential, particularly when performing
>> validationposit.admitquit. I've seen a Jackson structure design
>> turned into a flowchart and the structure is lost. Flowcharts encouraged
>> the use of GO TO.
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 4:45 PM David Crayford  wrote:
>>
>>> On 2020-06-07 10:48 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
> I consider the out of line PERFORM to be far more dangerous. I have a
>>> similar issue with REXX; it does not have lexical scope, and you can fall
>>> into a procedure.
 A noteworthy 1976 paper (behind a paywall):
   Software malpractice  a distasteful experience
   https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/spe.4380060303

 ... describes the pitfall set by a (too) clever programmer's relying on
 optimization by falling into procedures.

  In the day, I read it free in the University library.
>>> I'm sure that paper is an interesting read from a historical
>>> perspective. It's referenced in Code Complete along with another
>>> reference to Frank Rubin's letter to the ACM (March 1987)
>>> in which he asserts that goto-less programming has cost business
>>> "hundreds of millions of dollars".
>>>
>>> The original context of the "goto considered harmful" is lost on the
>>> younger generation, as at the time there were large swaths of developers
>>> who were trained before structured programming took off.
>>> There are a handful of use cases where "goto" makes the code simpler,
>>> cleaner and more readable. In these cases, you /should/ use goto
>>> statements. A good programmer can recognize these cases and use goto
>>> appropriately.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu

Re: "Everyone wants to retire mainframes"

2020-06-09 Thread Peter Bishop

Interesting re 2):

"The survey found that organizations are running an average of four
mainframes with an average age of 17 years. Sixty-four percent are
running mainframes between 10 and 20 years old, with 28% running
machines that are 20 to 30 years old. "

So 2/7 are running machines over 20+ years old? And 2/3 over 10 years?
What does that even mean? Smells fishy to me. What is the sample
size? Is it biased somehow?

Cheers,
Peter

On 9/06/2020 10:02 pm, Bob Bridges wrote:

A coworker just sent me this brief article.

https://www.techrepublic.com/article/everyone-wants-to-retire-mainframes-but-74-of-modernization-efforts-fail/

I'm interested in two aspects of this:

2) There's a really surprising number in there:

"...almost 100% of survey respondents plan to move legacy applications to the
cloud this year and the motivation to move is clear:

About three-quarters of leaders said they have started a modernization program but
failed to complete it"

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* If a problem has a single neck, it has a simple solution. */

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

"Everyone wants to retire mainframes"