Re: Stop the ragging on COBOL please [was: RE: ASM call by value]

Yes Bill Johnson is my real name and I’ve never been on LinkedIn. That’s just an ego trip and place where people like you go for confirmation. I’ve never needed it. Everything I’ve said here is 100% fact. You must be searching for me huh? Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Friday, April 7,

Re: Stop the ragging on COBOL please [was: RE: ASM call by value]

Why is ING stock down to $10 a share from $22 two decades ago. Size doesn’t matter, profits do. You’re as financially savvy as you are IT savvy. Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Friday, April 7, 2023, 12:17 AM, David Crayford wrote: On 7/4/23 12:12, Bill Johnson wrote: > ING is maybe top

Re: Stop the ragging on COBOL please [was: RE: ASM call by value]

LOLOLOLOL, there are thousands of Systems Programmers and other IT professionals in the world. About a dozen dominate this forum. I don’t have the free time or the ego necessary to post here hundreds of times a week. I don’t need the confirmation. My experience is more varied and longer than

Re: Stop the ragging on COBOL please [was: RE: ASM call by value]

On 7/4/23 12:12, Bill Johnson wrote: ING is maybe top 30. The stock has been a real dog losing half its value in the last 20 years. A money loser. Any company that shut down their mainframe and replaced it with Micro Focus, another company that loses money by the bushel, isn’t much of a bank.

Re: Stop the ragging on COBOL please [was: RE: ASM call by value]

ING is maybe top 30. The stock has been a real dog losing half its value in the last 20 years. A money loser. Any company that shut down their mainframe and replaced it with Micro Focus, another company that loses money by the bushel, isn’t much of a bank. They opened a challenger bank and shut

Re: Stop the ragging on COBOL please [was: RE: ASM call by value]

On 7/4/23 10:15, Bill Johnson wrote: I know more about banking than you know it alls. Already proved Crayford wrong  regarding the challenger banks. And ING dropped their mainframe as their stock price is cut in half the last 20 years. Explain the complex reasons or are you making that up too?

Re: Stop the ragging on COBOL please [was: RE: ASM call by value]

On 7/4/23 06:07, René Jansen wrote: They will be disappointed if they hear that, there are a fusion between Rijkspostspaarbank, NMB (Nederlansche Middenstandsbank, Postcheque en Girodienst, and Nationale Nederlanden. They are a very large bank in the Netherlands. And yes they are off the

Re: Stop the ragging on COBOL please [was: RE: ASM call by value]

I know more about banking than you know it alls. Already proved Crayford wrong  regarding the challenger banks. And ING dropped their mainframe as their stock price is cut in half the last 20 years. Explain the complex reasons or are you making that up too? Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On

Re: Stop the ragging on COBOL please [was: RE: ASM call by value]

For alot more complex reasons than your simplistic view of banking. Perhaps some time learning real banking might help. Or some macroeconomics to go along with it. I've made plenty over the years on the right bank investments. And took some risks with others. But I actually understand the

Re: Stop the ragging on COBOL please [was: RE: ASM call by value]

And their stock performance has been dismal for decades. Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Thursday, April 6, 2023, 6:07 PM, René Jansen wrote: They will be disappointed if they hear that, there are a fusion between Rijkspostspaarbank, NMB (Nederlansche Middenstandsbank, Postcheque en

Re: LE runtime

I recall that if you use certain language constructs, the binder complains about "this object requires PO format 3 and cannot be stored in a load module"; maybe if you initialize a static value using a function call (which is not valid in ANSI C). I once had the need to convert such a C++

Re: Stop the ragging on COBOL please [was: RE: ASM call by value]

I did. Mellon Bank during the transition from retail bank to investment bank. Retail banking sucks for profits. That’s why Citi is selling for 6 times earnings. ING stock would have lost you a ton of money over the last 20 years. Why are bank stocks selling at a huge discount to the market?

Re: LE runtime

C++ can produce object code that can be linked into a traditional load module in a PDS. I do it all the time. Charles On Thu, 6 Apr 2023 09:18:28 +0200, Bernd Oppolzer wrote: >Thanks. > >This (to me) seems related to the fact that PL/I still can produce >"classic" load modules, >while COBOL

Re: Stop the ragging on COBOL please [was: RE: ASM call by value]

Maybe you should have actually worked in retail banking, which clearly, you never have. Doug Fuerst d...@bkassociates.net -- Original Message -- From: "Bill Johnson" <0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu Sent: 06-Apr-23 19:16:58 Subject: Re:

Re: LE runtime

IMO, the other languages (PL/I, C) also support building program objects and very large programs (> 16 MB), but COBOL with the newest compiler version REQUIRES even small programs to live in PDSEs (as program objects) and does not allow old (classic) load modules. I'm not sure about this, but

Re: Stop the ragging on COBOL please [was: RE: ASM call by value]

Like I said, there’s little money in retail banking. And zero money to be made in challenger banking. It’s why they are all shrinking or closed. Mellon bank saw this 20+ years ago. ING & others are focusing more on investment banking. Mostly for the high net worth people but also people in our

Re: LE runtime

Cobol first started to use PDS/E in 2001 when exploiting new Cobol support for long program names, object-oriented programs and for using the Binder for DLLs instead of the prelinker. Program objects also cured the 16MB maximum load module size which was becoming a problem (PO size limit is 1GB).

Re: Stop the ragging on COBOL please [was: RE: ASM call by value]

What gave you the idea that retail banking is a low profit business? It really does not have to be depending on how it is run. ANYTHING can be low profit, even IBM, when it is run badly. Doug Fuerst d...@bkassociates.net -- Original Message -- From: "Bill Johnson"

Re: Stop the ragging on COBOL please [was: RE: ASM call by value]

More on ING. Why is ING bank closed?Dutch banking giant ING is leaving the Philippine retail banking market before the end of 2022. ING cited the “uncertain global macro situation in the last few years” as the primary reason that led to it decision to pull back from expanding activities in

Re: Stop the ragging on COBOL please [was: RE: ASM call by value]

I used to work at Mellon bank in Pittsburgh. Mellon shut down their retail banking division to concentrate on the investment industry. Over 20 years ago. Retail banking is a low profit business. Challenger banking is a no profit business. Which is why they are failing. Sent from Yahoo Mail

Re: Stop the ragging on COBOL please [was: RE: ASM call by value]

The know it all took a few days for this. ING is partially a bank but they still shut down their challenger “quasi bank” YOLT. And the other challenger “banks” are struggling. Funny how that happens when the cost of money increases. And investors want profits and returns for their investments. 

Re: Stop the ragging on COBOL please [was: RE: ASM call by value]

They will be disappointed if they hear that, there are a fusion between Rijkspostspaarbank, NMB (Nederlansche Middenstandsbank, Postcheque en Girodienst, and Nationale Nederlanden. They are a very large bank in the Netherlands. And yes they are off the mainframe, running a lot of mainframe

Re: Stop the ragging on COBOL please [was: RE: ASM call by value]

Here’s some comments from the ING CEO. From 2016. Speaking to The Register, he confirmed the finance giant still ran mainframes: “You won’t find a bank without a mainframe, unless recently established.” But, he continued, “We are extremely aggressively moving away from them.” This was not

Re: Stop the ragging on COBOL please [was: RE: ASM call by value]

ING isn’t a bank either.  Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Thursday, April 6, 2023, 5:59 PM, David Crayford wrote: > On 5 Apr 2023, at 11:20, Bill Johnson > <0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > > I remember this. > David Crayford said: > ”I'm calling BS. None of the

Re: Stop the ragging on COBOL please [was: RE: ASM call by value]

> On 5 Apr 2023, at 11:20, Bill Johnson > <0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > > I remember this. > David Crayford said: > ”I'm calling BS. None of the challenger banks (Startling, Yolt, Monzo, > Moneze, N26 etc) run mainframes. They have millions of customers and are >

Re: IBM z16 Model A02 Announcement

When we were looking at a DS8k, it was cheaper to buy it in the rack vs. buying the model you could install into the gap in the new z 19-inch rack CPU. I wonder if the same will be true for the z16? Tony Thigpen Tom Brennan wrote on 4/6/23 16:45: That's how I see it: the ability to add a

Re: IBM z16 Model A02 Announcement

That's how I see it: the ability to add a switch or disk or R42 or whatever to the unused space. But someone I work with brought up another possibility, that it could make non-mainframe Linux folks feel more at home with the hardware. The 19" racks sure look a lot nicer in a datacenter. I

Re: IBM z16 Model A02 Announcement

At least it was a rack you could put next to your other racks. Previously you had to have a stand alone area. And doing the half rack allows you to install a small disk system for a 1 rack mainframe and disk. On Thu, Apr 6, 2023 at 2:28 PM Pew, Curtis G wrote: > > On Apr 6, 2023, at 2:21 PM,

Re: IBM z16 Model A02 Announcement

On Apr 6, 2023, at 2:21 PM, Alan Altmark mailto:alan_altm...@us.ibm.com>> wrote: It's not a new concept, Enzo. IBM has always had models at the low end, and this is the 3rd generation in a row to be available in a 19-inch form factor (rack mount). But isn’t it the first time IBM is

Re: IBM z16 Model A02 Announcement

On Tue, 4 Apr 2023 20:23:21 +, Enzo D'Amato wrote: >I think that it's very good that we now have something like the multiprise >3000 back again. I think having smaller systems available for the "mainframe >curious" will help a lot in getting new companies on the platform. It's not a new

Re: JCL EXEC PARM= default?

On Thu, 6 Apr 2023 16:16:24 +, Peter Relson wrote: >Gil asked if the location linked to by Shmuel is the right place for the doc >about the case of no PARM. > >... We don't want the information in multiple places, > Usually I agree rather strongly with that principle. It makes

Re: REXX/COBOL conversion question

It's a bit worse with ooRexx; by the time I learn the ins and outs of all of the classes they will have added more. Once you get used to it, it's hard to live without it. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe

Re: REXX/COBOL conversion question

The "principle of least astonishment" works well for me in Rexx, although I confess it took a while to make the best of it :-) Yes, I checked in ooRexx and in the docs for Regina:- Comparison with = is case-sensitive and leading/trailing blanks are stripped and/or added. So ("" = "")

Re: REXX/COBOL conversion question

Why? Unless you use a strict (==) compare REXX will add trailing blanks. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of ITschak Mugzach [imugz...@gmail.com] Sent:

Re: REXX/COBOL conversion question

Yes to both. I rarely use ==, has = almost always has the semantics I want. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Paul Gilmartin

Re: REXX/COBOL conversion question

The variable is defined at level 05 so it is probably part of a structure (group item in terms of cobol). You must maintain the copect length. For example xxx = copies(' ',12). Btw, the compare is ok and will work same as in cobol. Best ITschak בתאריך יום ה׳, 6 באפר׳ 2023 ב-17:58 מאת Allan

Re: JCL EXEC PARM= default?

Gil asked if the location linked to by Shmuel is the right place for the doc about the case of no PARM. To be clear, that location is here: https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.5.0?topic=list-program-in-primary-asc-mode within the assembler services guide linkage conventions section. This is the

Re: REXX/COBOL conversion question

Allen:  This is Warren Brown.  Do you remember working with me? Warren  On Thursday, April 6, 2023 at 10:58:29 AM EDT, Allan Staller <0387911dea17-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: Classification: Confidential I have the following: COBOL: 05 FR-KWY PIC X(12). IF FR-KEY=SPACES  

Re: REXX/COBOL conversion question

On Thu, 6 Apr 2023 15:04:19 +, Seymour J Metz wrote: >A compare using = adds trailing blanks; use == if you need an exact match. > Trailing and/or leading. "=" has a very lenient criterion of numeric equality: "say 2 = ' 200e-2 '" 1 "==" gives better performance (empirically). --

Re: Fascinating Interview with Steve Jobs [non-mainframe] - now Gary Kildall

Well, IBM recently sued Micro Focus for allegedly trying to reverse engineer IBM’s software. Why make it easier? Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Thursday, April 6, 2023, 11:33 AM, Farley, Peter <031df298a9da-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: I've suspected for a long time that

Re: Fascinating Interview with Steve Jobs [non-mainframe] - now Gary Kildall

I've suspected for a long time that part of the continuing "closed" decision for the PL/* family of language compilers is that more recent versions may include facilities/capabilities at the millicode-level which if opened to the world would then expose "too much" of IBM's hardware IP. That is

Re: Fascinating Interview with Steve Jobs [non-mainframe] - now Gary Kildall

On my system I can find programs compiled with: PL/S II PL/AS PL/S III PL/AS FT PL/X 370 PL/X 390 And it looks like the current version is "zPLX" 3.2.1, compiled 6/6/2021. I'm guessing this is PL/X for z/OS. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of

Re: REXX/COBOL conversion question

A compare using = adds trailing blanks; use == if you need an exact match. From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Allan Staller <0387911dea17-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2023 10:57 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

REXX/COBOL conversion question

Classification: Confidential I have the following: COBOL: 05 FR-KWY PIC X(12). IF FR-KEY=SPACES MOVE.. REXX: IF fr_key = ' ' THEN Move.. Are these 2 statements equivalent? I suspect REXX will do a 1 -by compare vs. a 12 byte compare for COBOL. Can anyone

Re: JCL EXEC PARM= default?

Yes, I have had issues using copy link, and find it more reliable and then copy from the URL field. Also, I edit the domain name to make it generic, e.g., www-40 to www. From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Paul Gilmartin

Re: JCL EXEC PARM= default?

On Thu, 6 Apr 2023 14:01:24 +, Seymour J Metz wrote: >I've always seen cut used as a generic term for both C-C/C-V and C-X/C-V. > I'll be pedantic. "cut" deletes the selected string. >I find the relevant material in the manual, copy the URL from the URL line, >and manually type the

Re: Fascinating Interview with Steve Jobs [non-mainframe] - now Gary Kildall

Where does PL/8 (for 801) fit in the timeline. Could anybody add that to the article, preferably with citations? Thanks. From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Phil Smith III Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2023 10:03 AM To:

Re: Fascinating Interview with Steve Jobs [non-mainframe] - now Gary Kildall

Schmitt, Michael asked, re PL/X: >Then what do you call the current version? Looks like PL/X might still be the name, though this is hardly a very complete page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_PL/S -- For IBM-MAIN

Re: JCL EXEC PARM= default?

I've always seen cut used as a generic term for both C-C/C-V and C-X/C-V. I find the relevant material in the manual, copy the URL from the URL line, and manually type the fragment. From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Paul Gilmartin

Re: Fascinating Interview with Steve Jobs [non-mainframe] - now Gary Kildall

Then what do you call the current version? For example, z/OS 2.4 LE module CEEBINT was compiled on 3/12/2019 with a compiler identification string of "PL/X-390" v2.4, which I assumed meant that it was compiled with PL/X 390. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On

Re: LE runtime

I don't know much about the specific output formats that the compilers produce, but in the installations I know, the Binder is used to produce the load modules; this is necessary because run time objects have to be linked together with the output coming from the compiler. In my historic MVS

Re: LE runtime

Directly, or via GOFF to Binder? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Bernd Oppolzer [bernd.oppol...@t-online.de] Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2023 3:18 AM To:

Re: LE runtime

Are you sure that any of them can directly create load modules or program objects? I suspect that they still produce object modules, albeit in a modern format, and require, e.g., the Binder, as a final step. Does anybody remember SQUOZE ? -- Shmuel

Re: LE runtime

The "strange debugging option" for COBOL is, I believe, the ability to store the compressed source code data in a NOLOAD segment of a program object; something not supported with legacy load modules. A very useful thing, in my opinion. Much better than having the debug data in a separate

Re: LE runtime

Thanks. This (to me) seems related to the fact that PL/I still can produce "classic" load modules, while COBOL and C++ create program objects, which must reside in PDSEs. With C++ (I guess), this is due to the fact that (writable) static data can be initialized not only by static