Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
Yes, COND is ugly, unnatural and a booby trap for the unwary, but I never broke myself of the habit of using it. I would, however, want to train a newbie to understand it but to use IF/ELSE for new JCL. Whether I string things together in JCL or in a REXX script depends very much on what I am trying to do, and the question of AND/OR logic on completion codes is pretty far down my list of considerations. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Steve Smith [sasd...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, May 24, 2021 6:37 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies The problem I have with COND= is that it's back-asswards. First, it specifies conditions to NOT run the step. You have to keep in mind that with multiple conditions, any TRUE condition means don't run the step. Except for ONLY & EVEN, which specify conditions for which the step *will* run. Second, the natural way to code a test is to say "if variable [comparison] value", not the reverse that COND requires. It's certainly possible to train yourself to grok that, but it's about as unintuitive as it can be. The IF / ELSE constructs are a great improvement in understandability. You can continue using the old way if you like, and I don't see any argument that the new way causes any problems. So what's the complaint? For the record, I use both COND and IF as I see fit, but if an OR or AND rears its head, I'm likely to recast the whole thing into REXX. sas -- 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: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
The problem I have with COND= is that it's back-asswards. First, it specifies conditions to NOT run the step. You have to keep in mind that with multiple conditions, any TRUE condition means don't run the step. Except for ONLY & EVEN, which specify conditions for which the step *will* run. Second, the natural way to code a test is to say "if variable [comparison] value", not the reverse that COND requires. It's certainly possible to train yourself to grok that, but it's about as unintuitive as it can be. The IF / ELSE constructs are a great improvement in understandability. You can continue using the old way if you like, and I don't see any argument that the new way causes any problems. So what's the complaint? For the record, I use both COND and IF as I see fit, but if an OR or AND rears its head, I'm likely to recast the whole thing into REXX. sas -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
Gil, I attach a discussion about the IF/THEN vs COND= we had in 2011. That COND= BTW was for a real case of a chemical company running its payroll 100+ step job on our mainframe, but with a COND=(4,LT) on its job card. Each time one of its jobsteps hit a CC GT 4, the job ended and the ops had to call the company to explain the problem. The company finally explained that jobstep execution should continue at say "STEP20" if whatever combination of jobstep CCs was "this", and at say "STEP30" if the combination of jobstep CCs was "that" - else, if x then continue at y ... etc. The attachment includes also a copy of panel ISREDDE that mentions "*Use of panel ISREDDE will result in better performance in the editor.*" If you then issue command PANELID ON whilst in edit, I think you will see the panel is ISREDD2/3/4/5. Go to DSN=*.[S}ISPPLIB or whatever it is now called, compare the executable code in panel ISREDDE with that of ISREDDE2/3/4/5 (and bear in mind that this ISREDDE2 etc. code is executed every time any key is hit whilst in edit,) and you will hopefully understand that ISREDDE2 etc. is wasting as many CPU cycles as it can for the sake of displaying unnecessary drop-down menus and colors - none of which are needed for EDIT or ISR@PRIM etc. As they say, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" - and neither BROWSE, nor EDIT, nor ISPF 3.4, nor assembler, nor SMP/E, nor anything similar is "broke" and needs "fixing", unless the objective is to waste as many CPU cycles as possible under the pretense of thereby improving mainframe programming - which, of course, does not need improving. BTW The fix is to copy ISREDDE into a separate PDS, alias ISREDDE as ISREDDE2/3/4/5 in that PDS, concat it ahead of ISPPLIB, logoff/logon and then reinvoke EDIT: "PANELID ON" will still show ISREDDE2/3/4/5 but without its drop down menus and using far fewer CPU cycles. Likewise, ISPF option 1 should display BROWSE and not VIEW: so copy ISR@PRIM to your ISPPLIB ahead of *.[S]ISPPLIB, change whatever option 1 is to "1,'PGM(ISRBRO) PARM(ISRBRO01)'" and you will then get BROWSE instead of VIEW when you hit ISPF option 1. The so-called "improvements" (drop-down menus etc.) serve only to waste CPU cycles, de-skill and stultify (i.e. reduce to an equal level of stupidity and mediocrity) mainframe programming and in particular systems programming. I call it the 'Pinocchio effect', whereby mainframe sysprogs are offered beer and cigars in exchange for agreeing to be turned into donkeys. HTH Cheers, Chris Poncelet (retired sysprog) On 21/05/2021 21:20, CM Poncelet wrote: > "I fear the Greeks and when bearing gifts." > > On 20/05/2021 04:34, Paul Gilmartin wrote: >> On Thu, 20 May 2021 02:50:02 +0100, CM Poncelet wrote: >> >>> Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the >>> tool but by sharpening the user. >>> >>> "IF/THEN" does not handle all boolean AND/OR/NAND/XOR and >>> steps-not-executed conditions. >>> >> Example? In particular, something that can be done with "COND=" >> but not "IF/THEN". >> >>> Let not those who cannot master playing the violin demand that the >>> violin be made more easy, but let them try playing the banjo instead. >>> >> Earl Scruggs might have taken offense at that. >> >> Do you regard the invention of the automatic transmission a mistake? >> I assume you don't own one. >> >> Abacus vs. calculator vs. computer? >> >> Luddite. >> >> -- gil >> >> -- >> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN >> . >> > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > . > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN Paul Gilmartin wrote: > On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 02:01:45 +, CM Poncelet wrote: > > > >> Any boolean tests can be performed with 'COND=', but not so with 'IF >> ELSE etc.' We have already discussed this in the past. >> >> > > Sorry; I missed that. > > > >> But please show me how 'IF ELSE ...' handles the following: >> >> Execute STEPF if >> - STEPA sets CC=04, STEPB sets CC=00, STEPC did not execute, STEPD sets >> CC=08 and STEPE did not execute >> or if >> - STEPA sets CC=00, STEPB did not execute, STEPC sets CC=04, STEPD did >> not execute and STEPE sets CC=00 >> or if >> - STEPA did not execute, STEPB sets CC=00, STEPC sets CC=04, STEPD sets >> CC=08 and STEPE sets either CC=04 or CC=08 >> otherwise do not execute STEPF. >> >> > > OK: > > // > //IFELSEJOB 505303JOB,'Paul Gilmartin', > // MSGLEVEL=(1,1),REGION=0M > //* > //USERCOUTPUT JESDS=ALL,DEFAULT=YES, > //
Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
Yippee. On 23/05/2021 04:54, Seymour J Metz wrote: > Your "Yes, and COND is easy to understand; it's also unnatural in that it > requires using the brain as well as the fingers." is a fantasy that has no > rational connection to what I wrote. Sean Spicer would be proud of you. > > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of > CM Poncelet [ponce...@bcs.org.uk] > Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 11:30 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS > Technologies > > As in "Thank you for putting words in my mouth" and "Yes, and COND is > easy to understand; it's also unnatural in that itrequires using the > brain as well as the fingers. OK, got it. Thanks for explaining?" - or > what other "I'd rather speak for myself. Alternative facts?" > > > On 22/05/2021 04:04, Seymour J Metz wrote: >> Thank you for putting words in my mouth. However, I'd rather speak for >> myself. Alternative facts? >> >> >> -- >> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz >> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 >> >> >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of >> CM Poncelet [ponce...@bcs.org.uk] >> Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 10:43 PM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS >> Technologies >> >> A well-known Bank I was working at, as a systems programming consultant >> (in '99,) asked me to install custompac. So I did that and checked it >> out. It was so full of errors, including that the user enter the MCAT >> password and the hlq of PARMLIB (and of whatever else,) for it to >> function, never mind its then allocating dozens of CYLs and (if memory >> serves) 100's of directory blocks to SAMPLIB which, after the install, >> contained no more than a dozen or so of members - and then >> underestimated the DASD space and directory blocks required for SMPPTFIN >> and whatever the DLIB/TLIB loadlibs were, causing S*37 abends when it >> was executed. I pointed this out to the Bank and suggested that I write >> my own version of it. They gave me the go-ahead. My version then did >> everything custompac was supposed to do, including updating all its >> "logs" and datasets etc. and being 100% compatible with custompac - but >> requiring only two inputs from the user, with no MCAT password or >> PARMLIB etc. hlqs needed - and it genned all the correct SMP/E JCL to >> install/update the Bank's products. >> >> Later on, IBM kept on asking me to explain to them - and for weeks - how >> I had 'fixed' their custompac, so they could tell their developers in >> Canada what to do. >> >> Yes, and COND is easy to understand; it's also unnatural in that it >> requires using the brain as well as the fingers. OK, got it. Thanks for >> explaining. >> >> Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) >> >> >> >> On 22/05/2021 01:23, Seymour J Metz wrote: >>> When did custompack stop having SMP steps? >>> >>> Yes, COND is easy to understand; it's also unnatural. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz >>> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 >>> >>> >>> >>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of >>> CM Poncelet >>> Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 7:01 PM >>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >>> Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS >>> Technologies >>> >>> "I don't like it when IBM takes away tools" - and IBM stopped publishing >>> system control block DSECTs with ESA, thereby preventing sysprogs from >>> modifying its OSes (or so it thought.) >>> >>> Next step (perhaps in 10+ years' time) will be to withdraw support of >>> native SMP/E (and thus of CBPDO/CBIPO installs) and enforce using >>> custompac (or custompak, whatever it is now called) instead. That would >>> be a "progressive and continual stultification ofmainframe systems >>> programming" and of IBM's progressively taking over full control of how >>> customers' systems are installed, managed and maintained - as is already >>> done by Micro$oft. >>> >>> How "COND=" works is trivial and needs no 'help' from "IF/THEN&qu
Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
Your "Yes, and COND is easy to understand; it's also unnatural in that it requires using the brain as well as the fingers." is a fantasy that has no rational connection to what I wrote. Sean Spicer would be proud of you. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of CM Poncelet [ponce...@bcs.org.uk] Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 11:30 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies As in "Thank you for putting words in my mouth" and "Yes, and COND is easy to understand; it's also unnatural in that itrequires using the brain as well as the fingers. OK, got it. Thanks for explaining?" - or what other "I'd rather speak for myself. Alternative facts?" On 22/05/2021 04:04, Seymour J Metz wrote: > Thank you for putting words in my mouth. However, I'd rather speak for > myself. Alternative facts? > > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of > CM Poncelet [ponce...@bcs.org.uk] > Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 10:43 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS > Technologies > > A well-known Bank I was working at, as a systems programming consultant > (in '99,) asked me to install custompac. So I did that and checked it > out. It was so full of errors, including that the user enter the MCAT > password and the hlq of PARMLIB (and of whatever else,) for it to > function, never mind its then allocating dozens of CYLs and (if memory > serves) 100's of directory blocks to SAMPLIB which, after the install, > contained no more than a dozen or so of members - and then > underestimated the DASD space and directory blocks required for SMPPTFIN > and whatever the DLIB/TLIB loadlibs were, causing S*37 abends when it > was executed. I pointed this out to the Bank and suggested that I write > my own version of it. They gave me the go-ahead. My version then did > everything custompac was supposed to do, including updating all its > "logs" and datasets etc. and being 100% compatible with custompac - but > requiring only two inputs from the user, with no MCAT password or > PARMLIB etc. hlqs needed - and it genned all the correct SMP/E JCL to > install/update the Bank's products. > > Later on, IBM kept on asking me to explain to them - and for weeks - how > I had 'fixed' their custompac, so they could tell their developers in > Canada what to do. > > Yes, and COND is easy to understand; it's also unnatural in that it > requires using the brain as well as the fingers. OK, got it. Thanks for > explaining. > > Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) > > > > On 22/05/2021 01:23, Seymour J Metz wrote: >> When did custompack stop having SMP steps? >> >> Yes, COND is easy to understand; it's also unnatural. >> >> >> -- >> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz >> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 >> >> >> ____ >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of >> CM Poncelet >> Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 7:01 PM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS >> Technologies >> >> "I don't like it when IBM takes away tools" - and IBM stopped publishing >> system control block DSECTs with ESA, thereby preventing sysprogs from >> modifying its OSes (or so it thought.) >> >> Next step (perhaps in 10+ years' time) will be to withdraw support of >> native SMP/E (and thus of CBPDO/CBIPO installs) and enforce using >> custompac (or custompak, whatever it is now called) instead. That would >> be a "progressive and continual stultification ofmainframe systems >> programming" and of IBM's progressively taking over full control of how >> customers' systems are installed, managed and maintained - as is already >> done by Micro$oft. >> >> How "COND=" works is trivial and needs no 'help' from "IF/THEN" >> statements. "COND=" just means "execute the step *unless* any of the >> COND= parms is true." Anyone who has difficulty understanding even >> *that* should not be working with mainframes. >> >> Chris Poncelet (r) >> >> >> >> On 21/05/2021 23:02, Seymour J Metz wrote: >>>> ESA's OCO? >>> What's that in reference to? >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Shmuel
Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
As in "Thank you for putting words in my mouth" and "Yes, and COND is easy to understand; it's also unnatural in that itrequires using the brain as well as the fingers. OK, got it. Thanks for explaining?" - or what other "I'd rather speak for myself. Alternative facts?" On 22/05/2021 04:04, Seymour J Metz wrote: > Thank you for putting words in my mouth. However, I'd rather speak for > myself. Alternative facts? > > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of > CM Poncelet [ponce...@bcs.org.uk] > Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 10:43 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS > Technologies > > A well-known Bank I was working at, as a systems programming consultant > (in '99,) asked me to install custompac. So I did that and checked it > out. It was so full of errors, including that the user enter the MCAT > password and the hlq of PARMLIB (and of whatever else,) for it to > function, never mind its then allocating dozens of CYLs and (if memory > serves) 100's of directory blocks to SAMPLIB which, after the install, > contained no more than a dozen or so of members - and then > underestimated the DASD space and directory blocks required for SMPPTFIN > and whatever the DLIB/TLIB loadlibs were, causing S*37 abends when it > was executed. I pointed this out to the Bank and suggested that I write > my own version of it. They gave me the go-ahead. My version then did > everything custompac was supposed to do, including updating all its > "logs" and datasets etc. and being 100% compatible with custompac - but > requiring only two inputs from the user, with no MCAT password or > PARMLIB etc. hlqs needed - and it genned all the correct SMP/E JCL to > install/update the Bank's products. > > Later on, IBM kept on asking me to explain to them - and for weeks - how > I had 'fixed' their custompac, so they could tell their developers in > Canada what to do. > > Yes, and COND is easy to understand; it's also unnatural in that it > requires using the brain as well as the fingers. OK, got it. Thanks for > explaining. > > Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) > > > > On 22/05/2021 01:23, Seymour J Metz wrote: >> When did custompack stop having SMP steps? >> >> Yes, COND is easy to understand; it's also unnatural. >> >> >> -- >> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz >> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 >> >> >> ________________ >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of >> CM Poncelet >> Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 7:01 PM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS >> Technologies >> >> "I don't like it when IBM takes away tools" - and IBM stopped publishing >> system control block DSECTs with ESA, thereby preventing sysprogs from >> modifying its OSes (or so it thought.) >> >> Next step (perhaps in 10+ years' time) will be to withdraw support of >> native SMP/E (and thus of CBPDO/CBIPO installs) and enforce using >> custompac (or custompak, whatever it is now called) instead. That would >> be a "progressive and continual stultification ofmainframe systems >> programming" and of IBM's progressively taking over full control of how >> customers' systems are installed, managed and maintained - as is already >> done by Micro$oft. >> >> How "COND=" works is trivial and needs no 'help' from "IF/THEN" >> statements. "COND=" just means "execute the step *unless* any of the >> COND= parms is true." Anyone who has difficulty understanding even >> *that* should not be working with mainframes. >> >> Chris Poncelet (r) >> >> >> >> On 21/05/2021 23:02, Seymour J Metz wrote: >>>> ESA's OCO? >>> What's that in reference to? >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz >>> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 >>> >>> >>> >>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of >>> CM Poncelet >>> Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 4:22 PM >>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >>> Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS >>> Technologies >>> >>> ESA's OCO? >>> >>> On 20/05/2021 08:43, Seymour J Metz wrote: >>>> Progress is also not
Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
Thank you for putting words in my mouth. However, I'd rather speak for myself. Alternative facts? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of CM Poncelet [ponce...@bcs.org.uk] Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 10:43 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies A well-known Bank I was working at, as a systems programming consultant (in '99,) asked me to install custompac. So I did that and checked it out. It was so full of errors, including that the user enter the MCAT password and the hlq of PARMLIB (and of whatever else,) for it to function, never mind its then allocating dozens of CYLs and (if memory serves) 100's of directory blocks to SAMPLIB which, after the install, contained no more than a dozen or so of members - and then underestimated the DASD space and directory blocks required for SMPPTFIN and whatever the DLIB/TLIB loadlibs were, causing S*37 abends when it was executed. I pointed this out to the Bank and suggested that I write my own version of it. They gave me the go-ahead. My version then did everything custompac was supposed to do, including updating all its "logs" and datasets etc. and being 100% compatible with custompac - but requiring only two inputs from the user, with no MCAT password or PARMLIB etc. hlqs needed - and it genned all the correct SMP/E JCL to install/update the Bank's products. Later on, IBM kept on asking me to explain to them - and for weeks - how I had 'fixed' their custompac, so they could tell their developers in Canada what to do. Yes, and COND is easy to understand; it's also unnatural in that it requires using the brain as well as the fingers. OK, got it. Thanks for explaining. Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) On 22/05/2021 01:23, Seymour J Metz wrote: > When did custompack stop having SMP steps? > > Yes, COND is easy to understand; it's also unnatural. > > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of > CM Poncelet > Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 7:01 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS > Technologies > > "I don't like it when IBM takes away tools" - and IBM stopped publishing > system control block DSECTs with ESA, thereby preventing sysprogs from > modifying its OSes (or so it thought.) > > Next step (perhaps in 10+ years' time) will be to withdraw support of > native SMP/E (and thus of CBPDO/CBIPO installs) and enforce using > custompac (or custompak, whatever it is now called) instead. That would > be a "progressive and continual stultification ofmainframe systems > programming" and of IBM's progressively taking over full control of how > customers' systems are installed, managed and maintained - as is already > done by Micro$oft. > > How "COND=" works is trivial and needs no 'help' from "IF/THEN" > statements. "COND=" just means "execute the step *unless* any of the > COND= parms is true." Anyone who has difficulty understanding even > *that* should not be working with mainframes. > > Chris Poncelet (r) > > > > On 21/05/2021 23:02, Seymour J Metz wrote: >>> ESA's OCO? >> What's that in reference to? >> >> >> -- >> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz >> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 >> >> >> ____ >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of >> CM Poncelet >> Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 4:22 PM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS >> Technologies >> >> ESA's OCO? >> >> On 20/05/2021 08:43, Seymour J Metz wrote: >>> Progress is also not made by pretending that a blunt tool is sharp just >>> because you're used to it. COND= is a blunt tool, and IF/THEN puts a >>> bandage over some, but not all, of its ugliness. >>> >>> What's wrong with taking advantage of skeletons and such? Yes, I have been >>> known to hand craft an SMP/E job when the templates didn't suit my needs, >>> but what's wrong with taking advantage of them when it saves me time? >>> >>> I don't like it when IBM takes away tools, but that's not the same as >>> providing new tools that I can ignore when they don't suit the task at hand. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz >>> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 >>> >>> ___
Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
A well-known Bank I was working at, as a systems programming consultant (in '99,) asked me to install custompac. So I did that and checked it out. It was so full of errors, including that the user enter the MCAT password and the hlq of PARMLIB (and of whatever else,) for it to function, never mind its then allocating dozens of CYLs and (if memory serves) 100's of directory blocks to SAMPLIB which, after the install, contained no more than a dozen or so of members - and then underestimated the DASD space and directory blocks required for SMPPTFIN and whatever the DLIB/TLIB loadlibs were, causing S*37 abends when it was executed. I pointed this out to the Bank and suggested that I write my own version of it. They gave me the go-ahead. My version then did everything custompac was supposed to do, including updating all its "logs" and datasets etc. and being 100% compatible with custompac - but requiring only two inputs from the user, with no MCAT password or PARMLIB etc. hlqs needed - and it genned all the correct SMP/E JCL to install/update the Bank's products. Later on, IBM kept on asking me to explain to them - and for weeks - how I had 'fixed' their custompac, so they could tell their developers in Canada what to do. Yes, and COND is easy to understand; it's also unnatural in that it requires using the brain as well as the fingers. OK, got it. Thanks for explaining. Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) On 22/05/2021 01:23, Seymour J Metz wrote: > When did custompack stop having SMP steps? > > Yes, COND is easy to understand; it's also unnatural. > > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of > CM Poncelet > Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 7:01 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS > Technologies > > "I don't like it when IBM takes away tools" - and IBM stopped publishing > system control block DSECTs with ESA, thereby preventing sysprogs from > modifying its OSes (or so it thought.) > > Next step (perhaps in 10+ years' time) will be to withdraw support of > native SMP/E (and thus of CBPDO/CBIPO installs) and enforce using > custompac (or custompak, whatever it is now called) instead. That would > be a "progressive and continual stultification ofmainframe systems > programming" and of IBM's progressively taking over full control of how > customers' systems are installed, managed and maintained - as is already > done by Micro$oft. > > How "COND=" works is trivial and needs no 'help' from "IF/THEN" > statements. "COND=" just means "execute the step *unless* any of the > COND= parms is true." Anyone who has difficulty understanding even > *that* should not be working with mainframes. > > Chris Poncelet (r) > > > > On 21/05/2021 23:02, Seymour J Metz wrote: >>> ESA's OCO? >> What's that in reference to? >> >> >> -- >> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz >> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 >> >> >> ____ >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of >> CM Poncelet >> Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 4:22 PM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS >> Technologies >> >> ESA's OCO? >> >> On 20/05/2021 08:43, Seymour J Metz wrote: >>> Progress is also not made by pretending that a blunt tool is sharp just >>> because you're used to it. COND= is a blunt tool, and IF/THEN puts a >>> bandage over some, but not all, of its ugliness. >>> >>> What's wrong with taking advantage of skeletons and such? Yes, I have been >>> known to hand craft an SMP/E job when the templates didn't suit my needs, >>> but what's wrong with taking advantage of them when it saves me time? >>> >>> I don't like it when IBM takes away tools, but that's not the same as >>> providing new tools that I can ignore when they don't suit the task at hand. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz >>> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 >>> >>> >>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of >>> CM Poncelet [ponce...@bcs.org.uk] >>> Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 9:50 PM >>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >>> Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS >>> Technologies >>> >>> Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the >>&
Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
When did custompack stop having SMP steps? Yes, COND is easy to understand; it's also unnatural. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of CM Poncelet Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 7:01 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies "I don't like it when IBM takes away tools" - and IBM stopped publishing system control block DSECTs with ESA, thereby preventing sysprogs from modifying its OSes (or so it thought.) Next step (perhaps in 10+ years' time) will be to withdraw support of native SMP/E (and thus of CBPDO/CBIPO installs) and enforce using custompac (or custompak, whatever it is now called) instead. That would be a "progressive and continual stultification ofmainframe systems programming" and of IBM's progressively taking over full control of how customers' systems are installed, managed and maintained - as is already done by Micro$oft. How "COND=" works is trivial and needs no 'help' from "IF/THEN" statements. "COND=" just means "execute the step *unless* any of the COND= parms is true." Anyone who has difficulty understanding even *that* should not be working with mainframes. Chris Poncelet (r) On 21/05/2021 23:02, Seymour J Metz wrote: >> ESA's OCO? > What's that in reference to? > > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of > CM Poncelet > Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 4:22 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS > Technologies > > ESA's OCO? > > On 20/05/2021 08:43, Seymour J Metz wrote: >> Progress is also not made by pretending that a blunt tool is sharp just >> because you're used to it. COND= is a blunt tool, and IF/THEN puts a bandage >> over some, but not all, of its ugliness. >> >> What's wrong with taking advantage of skeletons and such? Yes, I have been >> known to hand craft an SMP/E job when the templates didn't suit my needs, >> but what's wrong with taking advantage of them when it saves me time? >> >> I don't like it when IBM takes away tools, but that's not the same as >> providing new tools that I can ignore when they don't suit the task at hand. >> >> >> -- >> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz >> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 >> >> ____________ >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of >> CM Poncelet [ponce...@bcs.org.uk] >> Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 9:50 PM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS >> Technologies >> >> Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the >> tool but by sharpening the user. >> >> "IF/THEN" does not handle all boolean AND/OR/NAND/XOR and >> steps-not-executed conditions. >> >> Let not those who cannot master playing the violin demand that the >> violin be made more easy, but let them try playing the banjo instead. >> >> And SMP/E? In the 1980's it was 'recommended' to use its dialogs. In the >> late 90's, its Custom-Pak etc. became 'de rigueur' and 'de facto'. And >> yet I continued to use only native SMP/E - and did so daily to track >> down and fix PTFEs etc. etc. >> >> Who gains from this progressive and continual stultification of >> mainframe systems programming? Is it not Windows for mainframes? >> >> As they say, "Use it or lose it." >> >> Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) >> >> >> >> On 19/05/2021 01:55, Nash, Jonathan S. wrote: >>> Once I learned of the IF/THEN statements for >>> JCL I never used COND= again. IF/THEN is much >>> easier to use and to explain to new people. >>> I have seen many people code COND statements >>> incorrectly because they did not acually >>> understand how they worked. >>> >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of >>> CM Poncelet >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 8:19 PM >>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies >>> >>> With all due respect, anyone who has difficulty coding JCL COND= >>> statements should consider *not* working with IBM mainframe systems. >>> >>> All boolean conditional
Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
That's a common misconception. BAL is the assembler for BPS/360, called basic because it lack macros. With the exception of the oddball 20 and 44, BAL was the last basic assembler in the S/360 line. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of CM Poncelet Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 7:29 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies "BAL" means "Basic Assembler Language" and is short for everything that followed it, including HLASM and conditional macro assembler. Cheers ;-) On 21/05/2021 23:10, Seymour J Metz wrote: > I am proud to say that I have never used BAL. But I have used SOAP, TASS, > 7070 Autocoder, 1401 Autocoder, MODSAP. SAAL, COMPASS and the usual D, F, G, > H and HLASM. > > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of > CM Poncelet > Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 4:17 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS > Technologies > > I have used high level languages (PL/I, COBOL, Fortran, C) as well as > assemblers (6502, VAX-11/750 macro, ICL System 25, IBM BAL, intel) - and > also machine code for zaps and dumps - but I am now retired , > thanks . > > On 20/05/2021 10:17, Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw wrote: >> Can I deduce from this that you don’t use high level languages? >> But if so, then even using assembler is too easy. >> Let's write everything in machine code . >> >> Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw >> Reverse Sweep Consulting Limited >> https://secure-web.cisco.com/1GrJEZumsUB0Xhtb70F_IHF9RQ0b1o_upCMR8WG7ymbgKhAb4HlOAGCQgonDMu6noKnk3J9qMiPbbhRiln1e0G4laaTkG6Vi0v9ivcYX4HL45-cifUhBGtSPzQFHOqcPw3hYYcXt82cPthTnc6ESqIp9uD_DaC5hOyDhOp-LKfP9cnMsuZIlnsqob98zODS7HggxCKPLYqWAbw26r03xIp6D45k2MEGzhvu7y4MBFAgrnY88QupFDywQt_-N7YkT58t9C1tUeNAnfD9TGEeC1eE9UEukBjlKqDH7GckWxsGmcwEpX244LOer7sgOMz-DbfHviz-xxHLQE7tC2DZTkhK8jcL-XeruRwu2xQ5LHt5WHtatb8jisiUmoKNgVBbZUI0l8LAcpJdy52qKMfurS6GN84xeCdVTWddmAnZkgrgbV3gppN3A-rvAdyiWBMvSv/https%3A%2F%2Frsclweb.com >> ‘Dance like no one is watching; encrypt like everyone is’ >> >> -Original Message----- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of >> CM Poncelet >> Sent: 20 May 2021 02:50 >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS >> Technologies >> >> Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the tool >> but by sharpening the user. >> >> "IF/THEN" does not handle all boolean AND/OR/NAND/XOR and steps-not-executed >> conditions. >> >> Let not those who cannot master playing the violin demand that the violin be >> made more easy, but let them try playing the banjo instead. >> >> And SMP/E? In the 1980's it was 'recommended' to use its dialogs. In the >> late 90's, its Custom-Pak etc. became 'de rigueur' and 'de facto'. And yet I >> continued to use only native SMP/E - and did so daily to track down and fix >> PTFEs etc. etc. >> >> Who gains from this progressive and continual stultification of mainframe >> systems programming? Is it not Windows for mainframes? >> >> As they say, "Use it or lose it." >> >> Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) >> >> >> >> On 19/05/2021 01:55, Nash, Jonathan S. wrote: >>> Once I learned of the IF/THEN statements for JCL I never used COND= >>> again. IF/THEN is much easier to use and to explain to new people. >>> I have seen many people code COND statements incorrectly because they >>> did not acually understand how they worked. >>> >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On >>> Behalf Of CM Poncelet >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 8:19 PM >>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS >>> Technologies >>> >>> With all due respect, anyone who has difficulty coding JCL COND= >>> statements should consider *not* working with IBM mainframe systems. >>> >>> All boolean conditional execution steps can be handled using only >>> COND= statements. I submitted a paper on this & it was published in >>> "Computing" in 1989. I would but cannot attach it, as uploading PDF >>> files to this discussion list is not permitted. >>> >>> No sysprog worth his
Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
"BAL" means "Basic Assembler Language" and is short for everything that followed it, including HLASM and conditional macro assembler. Cheers ;-) On 21/05/2021 23:10, Seymour J Metz wrote: > I am proud to say that I have never used BAL. But I have used SOAP, TASS, > 7070 Autocoder, 1401 Autocoder, MODSAP. SAAL, COMPASS and the usual D, F, G, > H and HLASM. > > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of > CM Poncelet > Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 4:17 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS > Technologies > > I have used high level languages (PL/I, COBOL, Fortran, C) as well as > assemblers (6502, VAX-11/750 macro, ICL System 25, IBM BAL, intel) - and > also machine code for zaps and dumps - but I am now retired , > thanks . > > On 20/05/2021 10:17, Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw wrote: >> Can I deduce from this that you don’t use high level languages? >> But if so, then even using assembler is too easy. >> Let's write everything in machine code . >> >> Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw >> Reverse Sweep Consulting Limited >> https://secure-web.cisco.com/1GrJEZumsUB0Xhtb70F_IHF9RQ0b1o_upCMR8WG7ymbgKhAb4HlOAGCQgonDMu6noKnk3J9qMiPbbhRiln1e0G4laaTkG6Vi0v9ivcYX4HL45-cifUhBGtSPzQFHOqcPw3hYYcXt82cPthTnc6ESqIp9uD_DaC5hOyDhOp-LKfP9cnMsuZIlnsqob98zODS7HggxCKPLYqWAbw26r03xIp6D45k2MEGzhvu7y4MBFAgrnY88QupFDywQt_-N7YkT58t9C1tUeNAnfD9TGEeC1eE9UEukBjlKqDH7GckWxsGmcwEpX244LOer7sgOMz-DbfHviz-xxHLQE7tC2DZTkhK8jcL-XeruRwu2xQ5LHt5WHtatb8jisiUmoKNgVBbZUI0l8LAcpJdy52qKMfurS6GN84xeCdVTWddmAnZkgrgbV3gppN3A-rvAdyiWBMvSv/https%3A%2F%2Frsclweb.com >> ‘Dance like no one is watching; encrypt like everyone is’ >> >> -Original Message----- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of >> CM Poncelet >> Sent: 20 May 2021 02:50 >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS >> Technologies >> >> Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the tool >> but by sharpening the user. >> >> "IF/THEN" does not handle all boolean AND/OR/NAND/XOR and steps-not-executed >> conditions. >> >> Let not those who cannot master playing the violin demand that the violin be >> made more easy, but let them try playing the banjo instead. >> >> And SMP/E? In the 1980's it was 'recommended' to use its dialogs. In the >> late 90's, its Custom-Pak etc. became 'de rigueur' and 'de facto'. And yet I >> continued to use only native SMP/E - and did so daily to track down and fix >> PTFEs etc. etc. >> >> Who gains from this progressive and continual stultification of mainframe >> systems programming? Is it not Windows for mainframes? >> >> As they say, "Use it or lose it." >> >> Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) >> >> >> >> On 19/05/2021 01:55, Nash, Jonathan S. wrote: >>> Once I learned of the IF/THEN statements for JCL I never used COND= >>> again. IF/THEN is much easier to use and to explain to new people. >>> I have seen many people code COND statements incorrectly because they >>> did not acually understand how they worked. >>> >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On >>> Behalf Of CM Poncelet >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 8:19 PM >>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS >>> Technologies >>> >>> With all due respect, anyone who has difficulty coding JCL COND= >>> statements should consider *not* working with IBM mainframe systems. >>> >>> All boolean conditional execution steps can be handled using only >>> COND= statements. I submitted a paper on this & it was published in >>> "Computing" in 1989. I would but cannot attach it, as uploading PDF >>> files to this discussion list is not permitted. >>> >>> No sysprog worth his salt has ever had a problem with coding JCL COND= >>> statements. >>> >>> Likewise IF/THEN statements belong in "JCL for dummies" - as do >>> symbols in JCL and SYSIN. Ditto IF/THEN in assembler. >>> >>> Chris Poncelet (r) >>> >>> >>> . >>> On 18/05/2021 14:02, Charles Mills wrote: >>>> Yeah, and IF/THEN is slightly better than COND= >>>> >>>> Also symbols in SYS
Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
"I don't like it when IBM takes away tools" - and IBM stopped publishing system control block DSECTs with ESA, thereby preventing sysprogs from modifying its OSes (or so it thought.) Next step (perhaps in 10+ years' time) will be to withdraw support of native SMP/E (and thus of CBPDO/CBIPO installs) and enforce using custompac (or custompak, whatever it is now called) instead. That would be a "progressive and continual stultification ofmainframe systems programming" and of IBM's progressively taking over full control of how customers' systems are installed, managed and maintained - as is already done by Micro$oft. How "COND=" works is trivial and needs no 'help' from "IF/THEN" statements. "COND=" just means "execute the step *unless* any of the COND= parms is true." Anyone who has difficulty understanding even *that* should not be working with mainframes. Chris Poncelet (r) On 21/05/2021 23:02, Seymour J Metz wrote: >> ESA's OCO? > What's that in reference to? > > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of > CM Poncelet > Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 4:22 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS > Technologies > > ESA's OCO? > > On 20/05/2021 08:43, Seymour J Metz wrote: >> Progress is also not made by pretending that a blunt tool is sharp just >> because you're used to it. COND= is a blunt tool, and IF/THEN puts a bandage >> over some, but not all, of its ugliness. >> >> What's wrong with taking advantage of skeletons and such? Yes, I have been >> known to hand craft an SMP/E job when the templates didn't suit my needs, >> but what's wrong with taking advantage of them when it saves me time? >> >> I don't like it when IBM takes away tools, but that's not the same as >> providing new tools that I can ignore when they don't suit the task at hand. >> >> >> -- >> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz >> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 >> >> ____________ >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of >> CM Poncelet [ponce...@bcs.org.uk] >> Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 9:50 PM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS >> Technologies >> >> Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the >> tool but by sharpening the user. >> >> "IF/THEN" does not handle all boolean AND/OR/NAND/XOR and >> steps-not-executed conditions. >> >> Let not those who cannot master playing the violin demand that the >> violin be made more easy, but let them try playing the banjo instead. >> >> And SMP/E? In the 1980's it was 'recommended' to use its dialogs. In the >> late 90's, its Custom-Pak etc. became 'de rigueur' and 'de facto'. And >> yet I continued to use only native SMP/E - and did so daily to track >> down and fix PTFEs etc. etc. >> >> Who gains from this progressive and continual stultification of >> mainframe systems programming? Is it not Windows for mainframes? >> >> As they say, "Use it or lose it." >> >> Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) >> >> >> >> On 19/05/2021 01:55, Nash, Jonathan S. wrote: >>> Once I learned of the IF/THEN statements for >>> JCL I never used COND= again. IF/THEN is much >>> easier to use and to explain to new people. >>> I have seen many people code COND statements >>> incorrectly because they did not acually >>> understand how they worked. >>> >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of >>> CM Poncelet >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 8:19 PM >>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies >>> >>> With all due respect, anyone who has difficulty coding JCL COND= >>> statements should consider *not* working with IBM mainframe systems. >>> >>> All boolean conditional execution steps can be handled using only COND= >>> statements. I submitted a paper on this & it was published in >>> "Computing" in 1989. I would but cannot attach it, as uploading PDF >>> files to this discussion list is not permitted. >>> >>> No sysprog worth his salt has ever had a problem with coding JCL COND= >>> statements. >>> &
Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
I am proud to say that I have never used BAL. But I have used SOAP, TASS, 7070 Autocoder, 1401 Autocoder, MODSAP. SAAL, COMPASS and the usual D, F, G, H and HLASM. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of CM Poncelet Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 4:17 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies I have used high level languages (PL/I, COBOL, Fortran, C) as well as assemblers (6502, VAX-11/750 macro, ICL System 25, IBM BAL, intel) - and also machine code for zaps and dumps - but I am now retired , thanks . On 20/05/2021 10:17, Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw wrote: > Can I deduce from this that you don’t use high level languages? > But if so, then even using assembler is too easy. > Let's write everything in machine code . > > Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw > Reverse Sweep Consulting Limited > https://secure-web.cisco.com/1GrJEZumsUB0Xhtb70F_IHF9RQ0b1o_upCMR8WG7ymbgKhAb4HlOAGCQgonDMu6noKnk3J9qMiPbbhRiln1e0G4laaTkG6Vi0v9ivcYX4HL45-cifUhBGtSPzQFHOqcPw3hYYcXt82cPthTnc6ESqIp9uD_DaC5hOyDhOp-LKfP9cnMsuZIlnsqob98zODS7HggxCKPLYqWAbw26r03xIp6D45k2MEGzhvu7y4MBFAgrnY88QupFDywQt_-N7YkT58t9C1tUeNAnfD9TGEeC1eE9UEukBjlKqDH7GckWxsGmcwEpX244LOer7sgOMz-DbfHviz-xxHLQE7tC2DZTkhK8jcL-XeruRwu2xQ5LHt5WHtatb8jisiUmoKNgVBbZUI0l8LAcpJdy52qKMfurS6GN84xeCdVTWddmAnZkgrgbV3gppN3A-rvAdyiWBMvSv/https%3A%2F%2Frsclweb.com > ‘Dance like no one is watching; encrypt like everyone is’ > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of > CM Poncelet > Sent: 20 May 2021 02:50 > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS > Technologies > > Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the tool but > by sharpening the user. > > "IF/THEN" does not handle all boolean AND/OR/NAND/XOR and steps-not-executed > conditions. > > Let not those who cannot master playing the violin demand that the violin be > made more easy, but let them try playing the banjo instead. > > And SMP/E? In the 1980's it was 'recommended' to use its dialogs. In the late > 90's, its Custom-Pak etc. became 'de rigueur' and 'de facto'. And yet I > continued to use only native SMP/E - and did so daily to track down and fix > PTFEs etc. etc. > > Who gains from this progressive and continual stultification of mainframe > systems programming? Is it not Windows for mainframes? > > As they say, "Use it or lose it." > > Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) > > > > On 19/05/2021 01:55, Nash, Jonathan S. wrote: >> Once I learned of the IF/THEN statements for JCL I never used COND= >> again. IF/THEN is much easier to use and to explain to new people. >> I have seen many people code COND statements incorrectly because they >> did not acually understand how they worked. >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On >> Behalf Of CM Poncelet >> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 8:19 PM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS >> Technologies >> >> With all due respect, anyone who has difficulty coding JCL COND= >> statements should consider *not* working with IBM mainframe systems. >> >> All boolean conditional execution steps can be handled using only >> COND= statements. I submitted a paper on this & it was published in >> "Computing" in 1989. I would but cannot attach it, as uploading PDF >> files to this discussion list is not permitted. >> >> No sysprog worth his salt has ever had a problem with coding JCL COND= >> statements. >> >> Likewise IF/THEN statements belong in "JCL for dummies" - as do >> symbols in JCL and SYSIN. Ditto IF/THEN in assembler. >> >> Chris Poncelet (r) >> >> >> . >> On 18/05/2021 14:02, Charles Mills wrote: >>> Yeah, and IF/THEN is slightly better than COND= >>> >>> Also symbols in SYSIN data. >>> >>> Charles >>> >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] >>> On Behalf Of Steve Horein >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 5:35 AM >>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >>> Subject: Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies >>> >>> I would argue JCL got better when symbols were allowed! :-) >>> https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.4.0?topic=es-symlist-parameter >>> >>> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:46 PM Charles Mills wrote: >&
Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
> ESA's OCO? What's that in reference to? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of CM Poncelet Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 4:22 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies ESA's OCO? On 20/05/2021 08:43, Seymour J Metz wrote: > Progress is also not made by pretending that a blunt tool is sharp just > because you're used to it. COND= is a blunt tool, and IF/THEN puts a bandage > over some, but not all, of its ugliness. > > What's wrong with taking advantage of skeletons and such? Yes, I have been > known to hand craft an SMP/E job when the templates didn't suit my needs, but > what's wrong with taking advantage of them when it saves me time? > > I don't like it when IBM takes away tools, but that's not the same as > providing new tools that I can ignore when they don't suit the task at hand. > > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of > CM Poncelet [ponce...@bcs.org.uk] > Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 9:50 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS > Technologies > > Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the > tool but by sharpening the user. > > "IF/THEN" does not handle all boolean AND/OR/NAND/XOR and > steps-not-executed conditions. > > Let not those who cannot master playing the violin demand that the > violin be made more easy, but let them try playing the banjo instead. > > And SMP/E? In the 1980's it was 'recommended' to use its dialogs. In the > late 90's, its Custom-Pak etc. became 'de rigueur' and 'de facto'. And > yet I continued to use only native SMP/E - and did so daily to track > down and fix PTFEs etc. etc. > > Who gains from this progressive and continual stultification of > mainframe systems programming? Is it not Windows for mainframes? > > As they say, "Use it or lose it." > > Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) > > > > On 19/05/2021 01:55, Nash, Jonathan S. wrote: >> Once I learned of the IF/THEN statements for >> JCL I never used COND= again. IF/THEN is much >> easier to use and to explain to new people. >> I have seen many people code COND statements >> incorrectly because they did not acually >> understand how they worked. >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of >> CM Poncelet >> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 8:19 PM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies >> >> With all due respect, anyone who has difficulty coding JCL COND= >> statements should consider *not* working with IBM mainframe systems. >> >> All boolean conditional execution steps can be handled using only COND= >> statements. I submitted a paper on this & it was published in >> "Computing" in 1989. I would but cannot attach it, as uploading PDF >> files to this discussion list is not permitted. >> >> No sysprog worth his salt has ever had a problem with coding JCL COND= >> statements. >> >> Likewise IF/THEN statements belong in "JCL for dummies" - as do symbols >> in JCL and SYSIN. Ditto IF/THEN in assembler. >> >> Chris Poncelet (r) >> >> >> . >> On 18/05/2021 14:02, Charles Mills wrote: >>> Yeah, and IF/THEN is slightly better than COND= >>> >>> Also symbols in SYSIN data. >>> >>> Charles >>> >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On >>> Behalf Of Steve Horein >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 5:35 AM >>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >>> Subject: Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies >>> >>> I would argue JCL got better when symbols were allowed! :-) >>> https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.4.0?topic=es-symlist-parameter >>> >>> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:46 PM Charles Mills wrote: >>> >>>> Steve, let me wade in here and suggest some big picture. I think SHARE and >>>> such is great for the details. >>>> >>>> What has changed since 2001? An idiosyncratic, IMHO list: >>>> >>>> - In 2001 SNA was yielding to TCP/IP. That transition has continued. An >>>> awful lot o
Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
Rex, By all means. But beware of those who give out unnecessary trinkets with one hand and take over control of systems with the other. Chris On 20/05/2021 15:37, Pommier, Rex wrote: > Sorry Chris, > > But I would venture a guess that you're pretty much standing alone here. The > "if it ain't broke don't fix it" otherwise known as "if it's good enough for > me it should be good enough for everybody else" attitude is what has us on a > slowly dying platform. So what if IF/THEN doesn't handle all the arcane > COND= Boolean logic? Sysprogs aren't the only people using JCL. If I can > easily train an application developer or an implementation analyst on the use > of IF/THEN once and have them go away and build their own JCL without needing > my continual assistance to help them understand COND= logic, it is a win-win > situation. I would bet every sysprogs on this list has horror stories of > having to fix somebody's COND= screw-up. > > It's actually quite enjoyable having a developer come to me puzzled about > COND=something and be able to say "Here, use this IF/THEN JCL logic instead", > and see the light come on in their eyes. > > But then, if PCs would have stuck with DR-DOS the mainframe would still be a > more major player in the SMB business arena. > > Rex > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of > CM Poncelet > Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 8:50 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS > / ZOS Technologies > > Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the tool but > by sharpening the user. > > "IF/THEN" does not handle all boolean AND/OR/NAND/XOR and steps-not-executed > conditions. > > Let not those who cannot master playing the violin demand that the violin be > made more easy, but let them try playing the banjo instead. > > And SMP/E? In the 1980's it was 'recommended' to use its dialogs. In the late > 90's, its Custom-Pak etc. became 'de rigueur' and 'de facto'. And yet I > continued to use only native SMP/E - and did so daily to track down and fix > PTFEs etc. etc. > > Who gains from this progressive and continual stultification of mainframe > systems programming? Is it not Windows for mainframes? > > As they say, "Use it or lose it." > > Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) > > > > On 19/05/2021 01:55, Nash, Jonathan S. wrote: >> Once I learned of the IF/THEN statements for JCL I never used COND= >> again. IF/THEN is much easier to use and to explain to new people. >> I have seen many people code COND statements incorrectly because they >> did not acually understand how they worked. >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On >> Behalf Of CM Poncelet >> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 8:19 PM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS >> Technologies >> >> With all due respect, anyone who has difficulty coding JCL COND= >> statements should consider *not* working with IBM mainframe systems. >> >> All boolean conditional execution steps can be handled using only >> COND= statements. I submitted a paper on this & it was published in >> "Computing" in 1989. I would but cannot attach it, as uploading PDF >> files to this discussion list is not permitted. >> >> No sysprog worth his salt has ever had a problem with coding JCL COND= >> statements. >> >> Likewise IF/THEN statements belong in "JCL for dummies" - as do >> symbols in JCL and SYSIN. Ditto IF/THEN in assembler. >> >> Chris Poncelet (r) >> >> >> . >> On 18/05/2021 14:02, Charles Mills wrote: >>> Yeah, and IF/THEN is slightly better than COND= >>> >>> Also symbols in SYSIN data. >>> >>> Charles >>> >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] >>> On Behalf Of Steve Horein >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 5:35 AM >>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >>> Subject: Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies >>> >>> I would argue JCL got better when symbols were allowed! :-) >>> https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.4.0?topic=es-symlist-parameter >>> >>> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:46 PM Charles Mills wrote: >>> >>>> Steve, let me wade in here and suggest some big picture. I think >>
Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
ESA's OCO? On 20/05/2021 08:43, Seymour J Metz wrote: > Progress is also not made by pretending that a blunt tool is sharp just > because you're used to it. COND= is a blunt tool, and IF/THEN puts a bandage > over some, but not all, of its ugliness. > > What's wrong with taking advantage of skeletons and such? Yes, I have been > known to hand craft an SMP/E job when the templates didn't suit my needs, but > what's wrong with taking advantage of them when it saves me time? > > I don't like it when IBM takes away tools, but that's not the same as > providing new tools that I can ignore when they don't suit the task at hand. > > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of > CM Poncelet [ponce...@bcs.org.uk] > Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 9:50 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS > Technologies > > Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the > tool but by sharpening the user. > > "IF/THEN" does not handle all boolean AND/OR/NAND/XOR and > steps-not-executed conditions. > > Let not those who cannot master playing the violin demand that the > violin be made more easy, but let them try playing the banjo instead. > > And SMP/E? In the 1980's it was 'recommended' to use its dialogs. In the > late 90's, its Custom-Pak etc. became 'de rigueur' and 'de facto'. And > yet I continued to use only native SMP/E - and did so daily to track > down and fix PTFEs etc. etc. > > Who gains from this progressive and continual stultification of > mainframe systems programming? Is it not Windows for mainframes? > > As they say, "Use it or lose it." > > Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) > > > > On 19/05/2021 01:55, Nash, Jonathan S. wrote: >> Once I learned of the IF/THEN statements for >> JCL I never used COND= again. IF/THEN is much >> easier to use and to explain to new people. >> I have seen many people code COND statements >> incorrectly because they did not acually >> understand how they worked. >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of >> CM Poncelet >> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 8:19 PM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies >> >> With all due respect, anyone who has difficulty coding JCL COND= >> statements should consider *not* working with IBM mainframe systems. >> >> All boolean conditional execution steps can be handled using only COND= >> statements. I submitted a paper on this & it was published in >> "Computing" in 1989. I would but cannot attach it, as uploading PDF >> files to this discussion list is not permitted. >> >> No sysprog worth his salt has ever had a problem with coding JCL COND= >> statements. >> >> Likewise IF/THEN statements belong in "JCL for dummies" - as do symbols >> in JCL and SYSIN. Ditto IF/THEN in assembler. >> >> Chris Poncelet (r) >> >> >> . >> On 18/05/2021 14:02, Charles Mills wrote: >>> Yeah, and IF/THEN is slightly better than COND= >>> >>> Also symbols in SYSIN data. >>> >>> Charles >>> >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On >>> Behalf Of Steve Horein >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 5:35 AM >>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >>> Subject: Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies >>> >>> I would argue JCL got better when symbols were allowed! :-) >>> https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.4.0?topic=es-symlist-parameter >>> >>> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:46 PM Charles Mills wrote: >>> >>>> Steve, let me wade in here and suggest some big picture. I think SHARE and >>>> such is great for the details. >>>> >>>> What has changed since 2001? An idiosyncratic, IMHO list: >>>> >>>> - In 2001 SNA was yielding to TCP/IP. That transition has continued. An >>>> awful lot of mainframe connectivity is now TCP/IP. Lots and lots of >>>> Internet connectivity to the mainframe. >>>> - Security is huge. Encryption is hot. Zero Trust is the buzzword of the >>>> month. >>>> - Everything is of course bigger. Z hardware goes up to what? 4TB real? >>>> Someone will correct me if
Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
"I fear the Greeks and when bearing gifts." On 20/05/2021 04:34, Paul Gilmartin wrote: > On Thu, 20 May 2021 02:50:02 +0100, CM Poncelet wrote: > >> Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the >> tool but by sharpening the user. >> >> "IF/THEN" does not handle all boolean AND/OR/NAND/XOR and >> steps-not-executed conditions. >> > Example? In particular, something that can be done with "COND=" > but not "IF/THEN". > >> Let not those who cannot master playing the violin demand that the >> violin be made more easy, but let them try playing the banjo instead. >> > Earl Scruggs might have taken offense at that. > > Do you regard the invention of the automatic transmission a mistake? > I assume you don't own one. > > Abacus vs. calculator vs. computer? > > Luddite. > > -- 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: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
I have used high level languages (PL/I, COBOL, Fortran, C) as well as assemblers (6502, VAX-11/750 macro, ICL System 25, IBM BAL, intel) - and also machine code for zaps and dumps - but I am now retired , thanks . On 20/05/2021 10:17, Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw wrote: > Can I deduce from this that you don’t use high level languages? > But if so, then even using assembler is too easy. > Let's write everything in machine code . > > Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw > Reverse Sweep Consulting Limited > https://rsclweb.com > ‘Dance like no one is watching; encrypt like everyone is’ > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of > CM Poncelet > Sent: 20 May 2021 02:50 > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS > Technologies > > Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the tool but > by sharpening the user. > > "IF/THEN" does not handle all boolean AND/OR/NAND/XOR and steps-not-executed > conditions. > > Let not those who cannot master playing the violin demand that the violin be > made more easy, but let them try playing the banjo instead. > > And SMP/E? In the 1980's it was 'recommended' to use its dialogs. In the late > 90's, its Custom-Pak etc. became 'de rigueur' and 'de facto'. And yet I > continued to use only native SMP/E - and did so daily to track down and fix > PTFEs etc. etc. > > Who gains from this progressive and continual stultification of mainframe > systems programming? Is it not Windows for mainframes? > > As they say, "Use it or lose it." > > Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) > > > > On 19/05/2021 01:55, Nash, Jonathan S. wrote: >> Once I learned of the IF/THEN statements for JCL I never used COND= >> again. IF/THEN is much easier to use and to explain to new people. >> I have seen many people code COND statements incorrectly because they >> did not acually understand how they worked. >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On >> Behalf Of CM Poncelet >> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 8:19 PM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS >> Technologies >> >> With all due respect, anyone who has difficulty coding JCL COND= >> statements should consider *not* working with IBM mainframe systems. >> >> All boolean conditional execution steps can be handled using only >> COND= statements. I submitted a paper on this & it was published in >> "Computing" in 1989. I would but cannot attach it, as uploading PDF >> files to this discussion list is not permitted. >> >> No sysprog worth his salt has ever had a problem with coding JCL COND= >> statements. >> >> Likewise IF/THEN statements belong in "JCL for dummies" - as do >> symbols in JCL and SYSIN. Ditto IF/THEN in assembler. >> >> Chris Poncelet (r) >> >> >> . >> On 18/05/2021 14:02, Charles Mills wrote: >>> Yeah, and IF/THEN is slightly better than COND= >>> >>> Also symbols in SYSIN data. >>> >>> Charles >>> >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] >>> On Behalf Of Steve Horein >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 5:35 AM >>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >>> Subject: Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies >>> >>> I would argue JCL got better when symbols were allowed! :-) >>> https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.4.0?topic=es-symlist-parameter >>> >>> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:46 PM Charles Mills wrote: >>> >>>> Steve, let me wade in here and suggest some big picture. I think >>>> SHARE and such is great for the details. >>>> >>>> What has changed since 2001? An idiosyncratic, IMHO list: >>>> >>>> - In 2001 SNA was yielding to TCP/IP. That transition has continued. >>>> An awful lot of mainframe connectivity is now TCP/IP. Lots and lots >>>> of Internet connectivity to the mainframe. >>>> - Security is huge. Encryption is hot. Zero Trust is the buzzword of >>>> the month. >>>> - Everything is of course bigger. Z hardware goes up to what? 4TB real? >>>> Someone will correct me if that is wrong. >>>> - Tape drives have pretty much gone away. They live on as virtual, >>>> emulated-on-DASD tape drives. >>>> - The Cloud. Read any
Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
Yep. Digital Research had a contract with all their prior customers. If they cut the price for a new customer, they change the price and REFUND the difference on all previous sales. On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 11:47 AM Seymour J Metz wrote: > > Admittedly DR-C was a sin for which there is no forgiveness, but my > understanding is that the IBM-DR negotiations foundered on the issue of > contract terms, and IBM gave away the farm with m$. > > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of > Charles Mills > Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 11:38 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for > MVS / ZOS Technologies > > Digital Research was certainly an accomplice in its own strangulation. > > Charles > > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On > Behalf Of Seymour J Metz > Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 8:07 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources > for MVS / ZOS Technologies > > Stuck to DR-DOS? We would have all been better off had m$ not taken over the > PC OS market and used the monopoly to strangle its competitors. > > SMB? Doesn't NFS play better with the *ix world? > > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of > Pommier, Rex > Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 10:37 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources > for MVS / ZOS Technologies > > Sorry Chris, > > But I would venture a guess that you're pretty much standing alone here. > The "if it ain't broke don't fix it" otherwise known as "if it's good enough > for me it should be good enough for everybody else" attitude is what has us > on a slowly dying platform. So what if IF/THEN doesn't handle all the > arcane COND= Boolean logic? Sysprogs aren't the only people using JCL. If > I can easily train an application developer or an implementation analyst on > the use of IF/THEN once and have them go away and build their own JCL > without needing my continual assistance to help them understand COND= logic, > it is a win-win situation. I would bet every sysprogs on this list has > horror stories of having to fix somebody's COND= screw-up. > > It's actually quite enjoyable having a developer come to me puzzled about > COND=something and be able to say "Here, use this IF/THEN JCL logic > instead", and see the light come on in their eyes. > > But then, if PCs would have stuck with DR-DOS the mainframe would still be a > more major player in the SMB business arena. > > Rex > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of > CM Poncelet > Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 8:50 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for > MVS / ZOS Technologies > > Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the tool > but by sharpening the user. > > "IF/THEN" does not handle all boolean AND/OR/NAND/XOR and steps-not-executed > conditions. > > Let not those who cannot master playing the violin demand that the violin be > made more easy, but let them try playing the banjo instead. > > And SMP/E? In the 1980's it was 'recommended' to use its dialogs. In the > late 90's, its Custom-Pak etc. became 'de rigueur' and 'de facto'. And yet I > continued to use only native SMP/E - and did so daily to track down and fix > PTFEs etc. etc. > > Who gains from this progressive and continual stultification of mainframe > systems programming? Is it not Windows for mainframes? > > As they say, "Use it or lose it." > > Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) > > > > On 19/05/2021 01:55, Nash, Jonathan S. wrote: > > Once I learned of the IF/THEN statements for JCL I never used COND= > > again. IF/THEN is much easier to use and to explain to new people. > > I have seen many people code COND statements incorrectly because they > > did not acually understand how they worked. > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On > > Behalf Of CM Poncelet > > Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 8:19 PM > > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS > > Technologies > > > > With all
Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
Sorry, my mind was in the gutter. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Pommier, Rex Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 11:46 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies Shmuel, By SMB I meant small and medium business, not server message block or whatever Micro$oft meant by it. Rex -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Seymour J Metz Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 8:07 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies Stuck to DR-DOS? We would have all been better off had m$ not taken over the PC OS market and used the monopoly to strangle its competitors. SMB? Doesn't NFS play better with the *ix world? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Pommier, Rex Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 10:37 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies Sorry Chris, But I would venture a guess that you're pretty much standing alone here. The "if it ain't broke don't fix it" otherwise known as "if it's good enough for me it should be good enough for everybody else" attitude is what has us on a slowly dying platform. So what if IF/THEN doesn't handle all the arcane COND= Boolean logic? Sysprogs aren't the only people using JCL. If I can easily train an application developer or an implementation analyst on the use of IF/THEN once and have them go away and build their own JCL without needing my continual assistance to help them understand COND= logic, it is a win-win situation. I would bet every sysprogs on this list has horror stories of having to fix somebody's COND= screw-up. It's actually quite enjoyable having a developer come to me puzzled about COND=something and be able to say "Here, use this IF/THEN JCL logic instead", and see the light come on in their eyes. But then, if PCs would have stuck with DR-DOS the mainframe would still be a more major player in the SMB business arena. Rex -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of CM Poncelet Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 8:50 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the tool but by sharpening the user. "IF/THEN" does not handle all boolean AND/OR/NAND/XOR and steps-not-executed conditions. Let not those who cannot master playing the violin demand that the violin be made more easy, but let them try playing the banjo instead. And SMP/E? In the 1980's it was 'recommended' to use its dialogs. In the late 90's, its Custom-Pak etc. became 'de rigueur' and 'de facto'. And yet I continued to use only native SMP/E - and did so daily to track down and fix PTFEs etc. etc. Who gains from this progressive and continual stultification of mainframe systems programming? Is it not Windows for mainframes? As they say, "Use it or lose it." Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) On 19/05/2021 01:55, Nash, Jonathan S. wrote: > Once I learned of the IF/THEN statements for JCL I never used COND= > again. IF/THEN is much easier to use and to explain to new people. > I have seen many people code COND statements incorrectly because they > did not acually understand how they worked. > > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On > Behalf Of CM Poncelet > Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 8:19 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS > Technologies > > With all due respect, anyone who has difficulty coding JCL COND= > statements should consider *not* working with IBM mainframe systems. > > All boolean conditional execution steps can be handled using only > COND= statements. I submitted a paper on this & it was published in > "Computing" in 1989. I would but cannot attach it, as uploading PDF > files to this discussion list is not permitted. > > No sysprog worth his salt has ever had a problem with coding JCL COND= > statements. > > Likewise IF/THEN statements belong in "JCL for dummies" - as do > symbols in JCL and SYSIN. Ditto IF/THEN in assembler. > > Chris Poncelet (r) > > > . > On 18/05/2021 14:02, Charles Mills wrote: >> Yeah, and IF/THEN is slightly better than COND= >> >> Also symbols in SYSIN data. >> >> Charles >> >> >> -Original Message-
Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
Admittedly DR-C was a sin for which there is no forgiveness, but my understanding is that the IBM-DR negotiations foundered on the issue of contract terms, and IBM gave away the farm with m$. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Charles Mills Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 11:38 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies Digital Research was certainly an accomplice in its own strangulation. Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Seymour J Metz Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 8:07 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies Stuck to DR-DOS? We would have all been better off had m$ not taken over the PC OS market and used the monopoly to strangle its competitors. SMB? Doesn't NFS play better with the *ix world? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Pommier, Rex Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 10:37 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies Sorry Chris, But I would venture a guess that you're pretty much standing alone here. The "if it ain't broke don't fix it" otherwise known as "if it's good enough for me it should be good enough for everybody else" attitude is what has us on a slowly dying platform. So what if IF/THEN doesn't handle all the arcane COND= Boolean logic? Sysprogs aren't the only people using JCL. If I can easily train an application developer or an implementation analyst on the use of IF/THEN once and have them go away and build their own JCL without needing my continual assistance to help them understand COND= logic, it is a win-win situation. I would bet every sysprogs on this list has horror stories of having to fix somebody's COND= screw-up. It's actually quite enjoyable having a developer come to me puzzled about COND=something and be able to say "Here, use this IF/THEN JCL logic instead", and see the light come on in their eyes. But then, if PCs would have stuck with DR-DOS the mainframe would still be a more major player in the SMB business arena. Rex -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of CM Poncelet Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 8:50 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the tool but by sharpening the user. "IF/THEN" does not handle all boolean AND/OR/NAND/XOR and steps-not-executed conditions. Let not those who cannot master playing the violin demand that the violin be made more easy, but let them try playing the banjo instead. And SMP/E? In the 1980's it was 'recommended' to use its dialogs. In the late 90's, its Custom-Pak etc. became 'de rigueur' and 'de facto'. And yet I continued to use only native SMP/E - and did so daily to track down and fix PTFEs etc. etc. Who gains from this progressive and continual stultification of mainframe systems programming? Is it not Windows for mainframes? As they say, "Use it or lose it." Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) On 19/05/2021 01:55, Nash, Jonathan S. wrote: > Once I learned of the IF/THEN statements for JCL I never used COND= > again. IF/THEN is much easier to use and to explain to new people. > I have seen many people code COND statements incorrectly because they > did not acually understand how they worked. > > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On > Behalf Of CM Poncelet > Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 8:19 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS > Technologies > > With all due respect, anyone who has difficulty coding JCL COND= > statements should consider *not* working with IBM mainframe systems. > > All boolean conditional execution steps can be handled using only > COND= statements. I submitted a paper on this & it was published in > "Computing" in 1989. I would but cannot attach it, as uploading PDF > files to this discussion list is not permitted. > > No sysprog worth his salt has ever had a problem with coding JCL COND= > statements. > > Likewise IF/THEN statements belong in "JCL for dummies" - as do > symbols in JCL and SYSIN. Ditto IF/THEN in assembler. > > Chris Poncelet (r) > > > . > On 18/05/2021 14:02, Charles Mills wrote: >> Yeah, and IF/THEN is slightly better than COND= >&g
Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
Shmuel, By SMB I meant small and medium business, not server message block or whatever Micro$oft meant by it. Rex -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Seymour J Metz Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 8:07 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies Stuck to DR-DOS? We would have all been better off had m$ not taken over the PC OS market and used the monopoly to strangle its competitors. SMB? Doesn't NFS play better with the *ix world? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Pommier, Rex Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 10:37 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies Sorry Chris, But I would venture a guess that you're pretty much standing alone here. The "if it ain't broke don't fix it" otherwise known as "if it's good enough for me it should be good enough for everybody else" attitude is what has us on a slowly dying platform. So what if IF/THEN doesn't handle all the arcane COND= Boolean logic? Sysprogs aren't the only people using JCL. If I can easily train an application developer or an implementation analyst on the use of IF/THEN once and have them go away and build their own JCL without needing my continual assistance to help them understand COND= logic, it is a win-win situation. I would bet every sysprogs on this list has horror stories of having to fix somebody's COND= screw-up. It's actually quite enjoyable having a developer come to me puzzled about COND=something and be able to say "Here, use this IF/THEN JCL logic instead", and see the light come on in their eyes. But then, if PCs would have stuck with DR-DOS the mainframe would still be a more major player in the SMB business arena. Rex -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of CM Poncelet Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 8:50 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the tool but by sharpening the user. "IF/THEN" does not handle all boolean AND/OR/NAND/XOR and steps-not-executed conditions. Let not those who cannot master playing the violin demand that the violin be made more easy, but let them try playing the banjo instead. And SMP/E? In the 1980's it was 'recommended' to use its dialogs. In the late 90's, its Custom-Pak etc. became 'de rigueur' and 'de facto'. And yet I continued to use only native SMP/E - and did so daily to track down and fix PTFEs etc. etc. Who gains from this progressive and continual stultification of mainframe systems programming? Is it not Windows for mainframes? As they say, "Use it or lose it." Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) On 19/05/2021 01:55, Nash, Jonathan S. wrote: > Once I learned of the IF/THEN statements for JCL I never used COND= > again. IF/THEN is much easier to use and to explain to new people. > I have seen many people code COND statements incorrectly because they > did not acually understand how they worked. > > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On > Behalf Of CM Poncelet > Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 8:19 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS > Technologies > > With all due respect, anyone who has difficulty coding JCL COND= > statements should consider *not* working with IBM mainframe systems. > > All boolean conditional execution steps can be handled using only > COND= statements. I submitted a paper on this & it was published in > "Computing" in 1989. I would but cannot attach it, as uploading PDF > files to this discussion list is not permitted. > > No sysprog worth his salt has ever had a problem with coding JCL COND= > statements. > > Likewise IF/THEN statements belong in "JCL for dummies" - as do > symbols in JCL and SYSIN. Ditto IF/THEN in assembler. > > Chris Poncelet (r) > > > . > On 18/05/2021 14:02, Charles Mills wrote: >> Yeah, and IF/THEN is slightly better than COND= >> >> Also symbols in SYSIN data. >> >> Charles >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] >> On Behalf Of Steve Horein >> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 5:35 AM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies >> >> I would argue JCL got better when symbols were allowed! :-) >> https://w
Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
Digital Research was certainly an accomplice in its own strangulation. Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Seymour J Metz Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 8:07 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies Stuck to DR-DOS? We would have all been better off had m$ not taken over the PC OS market and used the monopoly to strangle its competitors. SMB? Doesn't NFS play better with the *ix world? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Pommier, Rex Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 10:37 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies Sorry Chris, But I would venture a guess that you're pretty much standing alone here. The "if it ain't broke don't fix it" otherwise known as "if it's good enough for me it should be good enough for everybody else" attitude is what has us on a slowly dying platform. So what if IF/THEN doesn't handle all the arcane COND= Boolean logic? Sysprogs aren't the only people using JCL. If I can easily train an application developer or an implementation analyst on the use of IF/THEN once and have them go away and build their own JCL without needing my continual assistance to help them understand COND= logic, it is a win-win situation. I would bet every sysprogs on this list has horror stories of having to fix somebody's COND= screw-up. It's actually quite enjoyable having a developer come to me puzzled about COND=something and be able to say "Here, use this IF/THEN JCL logic instead", and see the light come on in their eyes. But then, if PCs would have stuck with DR-DOS the mainframe would still be a more major player in the SMB business arena. Rex -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of CM Poncelet Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 8:50 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the tool but by sharpening the user. "IF/THEN" does not handle all boolean AND/OR/NAND/XOR and steps-not-executed conditions. Let not those who cannot master playing the violin demand that the violin be made more easy, but let them try playing the banjo instead. And SMP/E? In the 1980's it was 'recommended' to use its dialogs. In the late 90's, its Custom-Pak etc. became 'de rigueur' and 'de facto'. And yet I continued to use only native SMP/E - and did so daily to track down and fix PTFEs etc. etc. Who gains from this progressive and continual stultification of mainframe systems programming? Is it not Windows for mainframes? As they say, "Use it or lose it." Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) On 19/05/2021 01:55, Nash, Jonathan S. wrote: > Once I learned of the IF/THEN statements for JCL I never used COND= > again. IF/THEN is much easier to use and to explain to new people. > I have seen many people code COND statements incorrectly because they > did not acually understand how they worked. > > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On > Behalf Of CM Poncelet > Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 8:19 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS > Technologies > > With all due respect, anyone who has difficulty coding JCL COND= > statements should consider *not* working with IBM mainframe systems. > > All boolean conditional execution steps can be handled using only > COND= statements. I submitted a paper on this & it was published in > "Computing" in 1989. I would but cannot attach it, as uploading PDF > files to this discussion list is not permitted. > > No sysprog worth his salt has ever had a problem with coding JCL COND= > statements. > > Likewise IF/THEN statements belong in "JCL for dummies" - as do > symbols in JCL and SYSIN. Ditto IF/THEN in assembler. > > Chris Poncelet (r) > > > . > On 18/05/2021 14:02, Charles Mills wrote: >> Yeah, and IF/THEN is slightly better than COND= >> >> Also symbols in SYSIN data. >> >> Charles >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] >> On Behalf Of Steve Horein >> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 5:35 AM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies >> >> I would argue JCL got better when symbols were allowed! :-) >> https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.4.0?
Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
Stuck to DR-DOS? We would have all been better off had m$ not taken over the PC OS market and used the monopoly to strangle its competitors. SMB? Doesn't NFS play better with the *ix world? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Pommier, Rex Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 10:37 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies Sorry Chris, But I would venture a guess that you're pretty much standing alone here. The "if it ain't broke don't fix it" otherwise known as "if it's good enough for me it should be good enough for everybody else" attitude is what has us on a slowly dying platform. So what if IF/THEN doesn't handle all the arcane COND= Boolean logic? Sysprogs aren't the only people using JCL. If I can easily train an application developer or an implementation analyst on the use of IF/THEN once and have them go away and build their own JCL without needing my continual assistance to help them understand COND= logic, it is a win-win situation. I would bet every sysprogs on this list has horror stories of having to fix somebody's COND= screw-up. It's actually quite enjoyable having a developer come to me puzzled about COND=something and be able to say "Here, use this IF/THEN JCL logic instead", and see the light come on in their eyes. But then, if PCs would have stuck with DR-DOS the mainframe would still be a more major player in the SMB business arena. Rex -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of CM Poncelet Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 8:50 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the tool but by sharpening the user. "IF/THEN" does not handle all boolean AND/OR/NAND/XOR and steps-not-executed conditions. Let not those who cannot master playing the violin demand that the violin be made more easy, but let them try playing the banjo instead. And SMP/E? In the 1980's it was 'recommended' to use its dialogs. In the late 90's, its Custom-Pak etc. became 'de rigueur' and 'de facto'. And yet I continued to use only native SMP/E - and did so daily to track down and fix PTFEs etc. etc. Who gains from this progressive and continual stultification of mainframe systems programming? Is it not Windows for mainframes? As they say, "Use it or lose it." Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) On 19/05/2021 01:55, Nash, Jonathan S. wrote: > Once I learned of the IF/THEN statements for JCL I never used COND= > again. IF/THEN is much easier to use and to explain to new people. > I have seen many people code COND statements incorrectly because they > did not acually understand how they worked. > > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On > Behalf Of CM Poncelet > Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 8:19 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS > Technologies > > With all due respect, anyone who has difficulty coding JCL COND= > statements should consider *not* working with IBM mainframe systems. > > All boolean conditional execution steps can be handled using only > COND= statements. I submitted a paper on this & it was published in > "Computing" in 1989. I would but cannot attach it, as uploading PDF > files to this discussion list is not permitted. > > No sysprog worth his salt has ever had a problem with coding JCL COND= > statements. > > Likewise IF/THEN statements belong in "JCL for dummies" - as do > symbols in JCL and SYSIN. Ditto IF/THEN in assembler. > > Chris Poncelet (r) > > > . > On 18/05/2021 14:02, Charles Mills wrote: >> Yeah, and IF/THEN is slightly better than COND= >> >> Also symbols in SYSIN data. >> >> Charles >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] >> On Behalf Of Steve Horein >> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 5:35 AM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies >> >> I would argue JCL got better when symbols were allowed! :-) >> https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.4.0?topic=es-symlist-parameter >> >> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:46 PM Charles Mills wrote: >> >>> Steve, let me wade in here and suggest some big picture. I think >>> SHARE and such is great for the details. >>> >>> What has changed since 2001? An idiosyncratic, IMHO list: >>> >>> - In 2001
Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
Actually that was a mistake on my part. I was thinking CP/M which was before MS-DOS. :-) I've actually used CP/M eons ago but don't know if I ever used DR-DOS. Rex -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of PINION, RICHARD W. Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 9:41 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies DR-DOS, now that's a name I've not heard in a long time (Obi Wan Kenobe). -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Pommier, Rex Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 10:38 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies [External Email. Exercise caution when clicking links or opening attachments.] Sorry Chris, But I would venture a guess that you're pretty much standing alone here. The "if it ain't broke don't fix it" otherwise known as "if it's good enough for me it should be good enough for everybody else" attitude is what has us on a slowly dying platform. So what if IF/THEN doesn't handle all the arcane COND= Boolean logic? Sysprogs aren't the only people using JCL. If I can easily train an application developer or an implementation analyst on the use of IF/THEN once and have them go away and build their own JCL without needing my continual assistance to help them understand COND= logic, it is a win-win situation. I would bet every sysprogs on this list has horror stories of having to fix somebody's COND= screw-up. It's actually quite enjoyable having a developer come to me puzzled about COND=something and be able to say "Here, use this IF/THEN JCL logic instead", and see the light come on in their eyes. But then, if PCs would have stuck with DR-DOS the mainframe would still be a more major player in the SMB business arena. Rex -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of CM Poncelet Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 8:50 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the tool but by sharpening the user. "IF/THEN" does not handle all boolean AND/OR/NAND/XOR and steps-not-executed conditions. Let not those who cannot master playing the violin demand that the violin be made more easy, but let them try playing the banjo instead. And SMP/E? In the 1980's it was 'recommended' to use its dialogs. In the late 90's, its Custom-Pak etc. became 'de rigueur' and 'de facto'. And yet I continued to use only native SMP/E - and did so daily to track down and fix PTFEs etc. etc. Who gains from this progressive and continual stultification of mainframe systems programming? Is it not Windows for mainframes? As they say, "Use it or lose it." Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) On 19/05/2021 01:55, Nash, Jonathan S. wrote: > Once I learned of the IF/THEN statements for JCL I never used COND= > again. IF/THEN is much easier to use and to explain to new people. > I have seen many people code COND statements incorrectly because they > did not acually understand how they worked. > > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On > Behalf Of CM Poncelet > Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 8:19 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS > Technologies > > With all due respect, anyone who has difficulty coding JCL COND= > statements should consider *not* working with IBM mainframe systems. > > All boolean conditional execution steps can be handled using only > COND= statements. I submitted a paper on this & it was published in > "Computing" in 1989. I would but cannot attach it, as uploading PDF > files to this discussion list is not permitted. > > No sysprog worth his salt has ever had a problem with coding JCL COND= > statements. > > Likewise IF/THEN statements belong in "JCL for dummies" - as do > symbols in JCL and SYSIN. Ditto IF/THEN in assembler. > > Chris Poncelet (r) > > > . > On 18/05/2021 14:02, Charles Mills wrote: >> Yeah, and IF/THEN is slightly better than COND= >> >> Also symbols in SYSIN data. >> >> Charles >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] >> On Behalf Of Steve Horein >> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 5:35 AM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies >> >> I would argue JCL got better when symbols were allowed! :-) >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.4
Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
DR-DOS, now that's a name I've not heard in a long time (Obi Wan Kenobe). -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Pommier, Rex Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 10:38 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies [External Email. Exercise caution when clicking links or opening attachments.] Sorry Chris, But I would venture a guess that you're pretty much standing alone here. The "if it ain't broke don't fix it" otherwise known as "if it's good enough for me it should be good enough for everybody else" attitude is what has us on a slowly dying platform. So what if IF/THEN doesn't handle all the arcane COND= Boolean logic? Sysprogs aren't the only people using JCL. If I can easily train an application developer or an implementation analyst on the use of IF/THEN once and have them go away and build their own JCL without needing my continual assistance to help them understand COND= logic, it is a win-win situation. I would bet every sysprogs on this list has horror stories of having to fix somebody's COND= screw-up. It's actually quite enjoyable having a developer come to me puzzled about COND=something and be able to say "Here, use this IF/THEN JCL logic instead", and see the light come on in their eyes. But then, if PCs would have stuck with DR-DOS the mainframe would still be a more major player in the SMB business arena. Rex -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of CM Poncelet Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 8:50 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the tool but by sharpening the user. "IF/THEN" does not handle all boolean AND/OR/NAND/XOR and steps-not-executed conditions. Let not those who cannot master playing the violin demand that the violin be made more easy, but let them try playing the banjo instead. And SMP/E? In the 1980's it was 'recommended' to use its dialogs. In the late 90's, its Custom-Pak etc. became 'de rigueur' and 'de facto'. And yet I continued to use only native SMP/E - and did so daily to track down and fix PTFEs etc. etc. Who gains from this progressive and continual stultification of mainframe systems programming? Is it not Windows for mainframes? As they say, "Use it or lose it." Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) On 19/05/2021 01:55, Nash, Jonathan S. wrote: > Once I learned of the IF/THEN statements for JCL I never used COND= > again. IF/THEN is much easier to use and to explain to new people. > I have seen many people code COND statements incorrectly because they > did not acually understand how they worked. > > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On > Behalf Of CM Poncelet > Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 8:19 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS > Technologies > > With all due respect, anyone who has difficulty coding JCL COND= > statements should consider *not* working with IBM mainframe systems. > > All boolean conditional execution steps can be handled using only > COND= statements. I submitted a paper on this & it was published in > "Computing" in 1989. I would but cannot attach it, as uploading PDF > files to this discussion list is not permitted. > > No sysprog worth his salt has ever had a problem with coding JCL COND= > statements. > > Likewise IF/THEN statements belong in "JCL for dummies" - as do > symbols in JCL and SYSIN. Ditto IF/THEN in assembler. > > Chris Poncelet (r) > > > . > On 18/05/2021 14:02, Charles Mills wrote: >> Yeah, and IF/THEN is slightly better than COND= >> >> Also symbols in SYSIN data. >> >> Charles >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] >> On Behalf Of Steve Horein >> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 5:35 AM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies >> >> I would argue JCL got better when symbols were allowed! :-) >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.4.0?top >> ic=es-symlist-parameter__;!!HnnddUIWDII9UQ!HOqHZ01GFT4JGSB82v3WH370P0 >> t7s0tHIMVgDmGr4We6lrkYplP2aODrYvHAioFxoZg$ >> >> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:46 PM Charles Mills wrote: >> >>> Steve, let me wade in here and suggest some big picture. I think >>> SHARE and such is great for the details. >>> >>> What has changed since 2001? An idiosyncratic, IMHO list: >>
Re: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
Sorry Chris, But I would venture a guess that you're pretty much standing alone here. The "if it ain't broke don't fix it" otherwise known as "if it's good enough for me it should be good enough for everybody else" attitude is what has us on a slowly dying platform. So what if IF/THEN doesn't handle all the arcane COND= Boolean logic? Sysprogs aren't the only people using JCL. If I can easily train an application developer or an implementation analyst on the use of IF/THEN once and have them go away and build their own JCL without needing my continual assistance to help them understand COND= logic, it is a win-win situation. I would bet every sysprogs on this list has horror stories of having to fix somebody's COND= screw-up. It's actually quite enjoyable having a developer come to me puzzled about COND=something and be able to say "Here, use this IF/THEN JCL logic instead", and see the light come on in their eyes. But then, if PCs would have stuck with DR-DOS the mainframe would still be a more major player in the SMB business arena. Rex -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of CM Poncelet Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 8:50 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: [External] Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the tool but by sharpening the user. "IF/THEN" does not handle all boolean AND/OR/NAND/XOR and steps-not-executed conditions. Let not those who cannot master playing the violin demand that the violin be made more easy, but let them try playing the banjo instead. And SMP/E? In the 1980's it was 'recommended' to use its dialogs. In the late 90's, its Custom-Pak etc. became 'de rigueur' and 'de facto'. And yet I continued to use only native SMP/E - and did so daily to track down and fix PTFEs etc. etc. Who gains from this progressive and continual stultification of mainframe systems programming? Is it not Windows for mainframes? As they say, "Use it or lose it." Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) On 19/05/2021 01:55, Nash, Jonathan S. wrote: > Once I learned of the IF/THEN statements for JCL I never used COND= > again. IF/THEN is much easier to use and to explain to new people. > I have seen many people code COND statements incorrectly because they > did not acually understand how they worked. > > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On > Behalf Of CM Poncelet > Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 8:19 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS > Technologies > > With all due respect, anyone who has difficulty coding JCL COND= > statements should consider *not* working with IBM mainframe systems. > > All boolean conditional execution steps can be handled using only > COND= statements. I submitted a paper on this & it was published in > "Computing" in 1989. I would but cannot attach it, as uploading PDF > files to this discussion list is not permitted. > > No sysprog worth his salt has ever had a problem with coding JCL COND= > statements. > > Likewise IF/THEN statements belong in "JCL for dummies" - as do > symbols in JCL and SYSIN. Ditto IF/THEN in assembler. > > Chris Poncelet (r) > > > . > On 18/05/2021 14:02, Charles Mills wrote: >> Yeah, and IF/THEN is slightly better than COND= >> >> Also symbols in SYSIN data. >> >> Charles >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] >> On Behalf Of Steve Horein >> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 5:35 AM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies >> >> I would argue JCL got better when symbols were allowed! :-) >> https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.4.0?topic=es-symlist-parameter >> >> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:46 PM Charles Mills wrote: >> >>> Steve, let me wade in here and suggest some big picture. I think >>> SHARE and such is great for the details. >>> >>> What has changed since 2001? An idiosyncratic, IMHO list: >>> >>> - In 2001 SNA was yielding to TCP/IP. That transition has continued. >>> An awful lot of mainframe connectivity is now TCP/IP. Lots and lots >>> of Internet connectivity to the mainframe. >>> - Security is huge. Encryption is hot. Zero Trust is the buzzword of >>> the month. >>> - Everything is of course bigger. Z hardware goes up to what? 4TB real? >>> Someone will correct me if that is wrong. >>> - Tape drives have pretty much go
Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
BTDT,GTS. They made us write in 650 machine code before they taught us about assemblers. I've also written zaps now and then. But, yes, happiness is a warm macro assembler, and only a masochist willingly writes in machine language. BTW, "high level" is in the mind of the beholder: I could make a case that HLASM is higher level than C. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw [032fff1be9b4-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu] Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 5:17 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies Can I deduce from this that you don’t use high level languages? But if so, then even using assembler is too easy. Let's write everything in machine code . Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw Reverse Sweep Consulting Limited https://secure-web.cisco.com/1QltAnKi-NU_CgtMHtNPS2QGlFmcLIggQfq1m35k0Mgrmfap0hNyGQTnNR6PnqcJHu9zSsXZT46CILPTesIT4OQcEu-WHBoCB0PM2BKszRSP3qmWRN02w-CyVl4cyks1cpCs9moh0aNw-Ijo8C09RZa8xOeD2T_jbrqMXUdSpIiEJxN-ZT165ZvME9NEd2Gwt7Hptp8vpzes30l0d2EvezWN3IK5QYYg7ZDiwXbeO6hbiVEPKGAwupchNkLRwGja2jNu5KpwJ5jk2XVRpJUbgvM-Wj8p4vptCnWPUiUiGW94cXaV5CtEtxxe2CBHQAum04hXffGNh4BVpr6zJwwc7Xnpxc5vkP51y2riYrtx89hrC9FFahehZXN-8vHtWVDQqmlnkcUlGiMJUuhO9KEIyDSAMylqEM_3eoBuZCFa8Vb44-N-2ctttBstwUZ9gfQHP/https%3A%2F%2Frsclweb.com ‘Dance like no one is watching; encrypt like everyone is’ -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of CM Poncelet Sent: 20 May 2021 02:50 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the tool but by sharpening the user. "IF/THEN" does not handle all boolean AND/OR/NAND/XOR and steps-not-executed conditions. Let not those who cannot master playing the violin demand that the violin be made more easy, but let them try playing the banjo instead. And SMP/E? In the 1980's it was 'recommended' to use its dialogs. In the late 90's, its Custom-Pak etc. became 'de rigueur' and 'de facto'. And yet I continued to use only native SMP/E - and did so daily to track down and fix PTFEs etc. etc. Who gains from this progressive and continual stultification of mainframe systems programming? Is it not Windows for mainframes? As they say, "Use it or lose it." Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) On 19/05/2021 01:55, Nash, Jonathan S. wrote: > Once I learned of the IF/THEN statements for JCL I never used COND= > again. IF/THEN is much easier to use and to explain to new people. > I have seen many people code COND statements incorrectly because they > did not acually understand how they worked. > > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On > Behalf Of CM Poncelet > Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 8:19 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS > Technologies > > With all due respect, anyone who has difficulty coding JCL COND= > statements should consider *not* working with IBM mainframe systems. > > All boolean conditional execution steps can be handled using only > COND= statements. I submitted a paper on this & it was published in > "Computing" in 1989. I would but cannot attach it, as uploading PDF > files to this discussion list is not permitted. > > No sysprog worth his salt has ever had a problem with coding JCL COND= > statements. > > Likewise IF/THEN statements belong in "JCL for dummies" - as do > symbols in JCL and SYSIN. Ditto IF/THEN in assembler. > > Chris Poncelet (r) > > > . > On 18/05/2021 14:02, Charles Mills wrote: >> Yeah, and IF/THEN is slightly better than COND= >> >> Also symbols in SYSIN data. >> >> Charles >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] >> On Behalf Of Steve Horein >> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 5:35 AM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies >> >> I would argue JCL got better when symbols were allowed! :-) >> https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.4.0?topic=es-symlist-parameter >> >> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:46 PM Charles Mills wrote: >> >>> Steve, let me wade in here and suggest some big picture. I think >>> SHARE and such is great for the details. >>> >>> What has changed since 2001? An idiosyncratic, IMHO list: >>> >>> - In 2001 SNA was yielding to TCP/IP. That transition has continued. >>> An awful lot of mainframe connectivity is now TCP/IP. Lots and l
Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
Can I deduce from this that you don’t use high level languages? But if so, then even using assembler is too easy. Let's write everything in machine code . Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw Reverse Sweep Consulting Limited https://rsclweb.com ‘Dance like no one is watching; encrypt like everyone is’ -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of CM Poncelet Sent: 20 May 2021 02:50 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the tool but by sharpening the user. "IF/THEN" does not handle all boolean AND/OR/NAND/XOR and steps-not-executed conditions. Let not those who cannot master playing the violin demand that the violin be made more easy, but let them try playing the banjo instead. And SMP/E? In the 1980's it was 'recommended' to use its dialogs. In the late 90's, its Custom-Pak etc. became 'de rigueur' and 'de facto'. And yet I continued to use only native SMP/E - and did so daily to track down and fix PTFEs etc. etc. Who gains from this progressive and continual stultification of mainframe systems programming? Is it not Windows for mainframes? As they say, "Use it or lose it." Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) On 19/05/2021 01:55, Nash, Jonathan S. wrote: > Once I learned of the IF/THEN statements for JCL I never used COND= > again. IF/THEN is much easier to use and to explain to new people. > I have seen many people code COND statements incorrectly because they > did not acually understand how they worked. > > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On > Behalf Of CM Poncelet > Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 8:19 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS > Technologies > > With all due respect, anyone who has difficulty coding JCL COND= > statements should consider *not* working with IBM mainframe systems. > > All boolean conditional execution steps can be handled using only > COND= statements. I submitted a paper on this & it was published in > "Computing" in 1989. I would but cannot attach it, as uploading PDF > files to this discussion list is not permitted. > > No sysprog worth his salt has ever had a problem with coding JCL COND= > statements. > > Likewise IF/THEN statements belong in "JCL for dummies" - as do > symbols in JCL and SYSIN. Ditto IF/THEN in assembler. > > Chris Poncelet (r) > > > . > On 18/05/2021 14:02, Charles Mills wrote: >> Yeah, and IF/THEN is slightly better than COND= >> >> Also symbols in SYSIN data. >> >> Charles >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] >> On Behalf Of Steve Horein >> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 5:35 AM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies >> >> I would argue JCL got better when symbols were allowed! :-) >> https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.4.0?topic=es-symlist-parameter >> >> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:46 PM Charles Mills wrote: >> >>> Steve, let me wade in here and suggest some big picture. I think >>> SHARE and such is great for the details. >>> >>> What has changed since 2001? An idiosyncratic, IMHO list: >>> >>> - In 2001 SNA was yielding to TCP/IP. That transition has continued. >>> An awful lot of mainframe connectivity is now TCP/IP. Lots and lots >>> of Internet connectivity to the mainframe. >>> - Security is huge. Encryption is hot. Zero Trust is the buzzword of >>> the month. >>> - Everything is of course bigger. Z hardware goes up to what? 4TB real? >>> Someone will correct me if that is wrong. >>> - Tape drives have pretty much gone away. They live on as virtual, >>> emulated-on-DASD tape drives. >>> - The Cloud. Read any airline magazine for the latest. >>> - Remember VM? It was pretty moribund in 2001. It has found new life >>> hosting thousands of Linux instances. Yes, Linux running like a >>> champ on Z hardware. Mainframe Linux is huge. You can run Linux in a >>> region of MVS in a "container." >>> - Speaking of which, there is a Z box that will not IPL z/OS! It is >>> called Linux One. It's a mainframe with a bit hobbled somewhere such >>> that mainframe operating systems will not IPL, only Linux. >>> - Lots of new features in core MVS but you would fully recognize the >>> environment. If you sit down at a TSO/ISPF session it will seem lik
Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
Progress is also not made by pretending that a blunt tool is sharp just because you're used to it. COND= is a blunt tool, and IF/THEN puts a bandage over some, but not all, of its ugliness. What's wrong with taking advantage of skeletons and such? Yes, I have been known to hand craft an SMP/E job when the templates didn't suit my needs, but what's wrong with taking advantage of them when it saves me time? I don't like it when IBM takes away tools, but that's not the same as providing new tools that I can ignore when they don't suit the task at hand. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of CM Poncelet [ponce...@bcs.org.uk] Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 9:50 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the tool but by sharpening the user. "IF/THEN" does not handle all boolean AND/OR/NAND/XOR and steps-not-executed conditions. Let not those who cannot master playing the violin demand that the violin be made more easy, but let them try playing the banjo instead. And SMP/E? In the 1980's it was 'recommended' to use its dialogs. In the late 90's, its Custom-Pak etc. became 'de rigueur' and 'de facto'. And yet I continued to use only native SMP/E - and did so daily to track down and fix PTFEs etc. etc. Who gains from this progressive and continual stultification of mainframe systems programming? Is it not Windows for mainframes? As they say, "Use it or lose it." Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) On 19/05/2021 01:55, Nash, Jonathan S. wrote: > Once I learned of the IF/THEN statements for > JCL I never used COND= again. IF/THEN is much > easier to use and to explain to new people. > I have seen many people code COND statements > incorrectly because they did not acually > understand how they worked. > > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of > CM Poncelet > Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 8:19 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies > > With all due respect, anyone who has difficulty coding JCL COND= > statements should consider *not* working with IBM mainframe systems. > > All boolean conditional execution steps can be handled using only COND= > statements. I submitted a paper on this & it was published in > "Computing" in 1989. I would but cannot attach it, as uploading PDF > files to this discussion list is not permitted. > > No sysprog worth his salt has ever had a problem with coding JCL COND= > statements. > > Likewise IF/THEN statements belong in "JCL for dummies" - as do symbols > in JCL and SYSIN. Ditto IF/THEN in assembler. > > Chris Poncelet (r) > > > . > On 18/05/2021 14:02, Charles Mills wrote: >> Yeah, and IF/THEN is slightly better than COND= >> >> Also symbols in SYSIN data. >> >> Charles >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On >> Behalf Of Steve Horein >> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 5:35 AM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies >> >> I would argue JCL got better when symbols were allowed! :-) >> https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.4.0?topic=es-symlist-parameter >> >> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:46 PM Charles Mills wrote: >> >>> Steve, let me wade in here and suggest some big picture. I think SHARE and >>> such is great for the details. >>> >>> What has changed since 2001? An idiosyncratic, IMHO list: >>> >>> - In 2001 SNA was yielding to TCP/IP. That transition has continued. An >>> awful lot of mainframe connectivity is now TCP/IP. Lots and lots of >>> Internet connectivity to the mainframe. >>> - Security is huge. Encryption is hot. Zero Trust is the buzzword of the >>> month. >>> - Everything is of course bigger. Z hardware goes up to what? 4TB real? >>> Someone will correct me if that is wrong. >>> - Tape drives have pretty much gone away. They live on as virtual, >>> emulated-on-DASD tape drives. >>> - The Cloud. Read any airline magazine for the latest. >>> - Remember VM? It was pretty moribund in 2001. It has found new life >>> hosting thousands of Linux instances. Yes, Linux running like a champ on Z >>> hardware. Mainframe Linux is huge. You can run Linux in a region of MVS in >>> a "container." >>> - Speaking of which, there is
Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
On Thu, 20 May 2021 02:50:02 +0100, CM Poncelet wrote: >Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the >tool but by sharpening the user. > >"IF/THEN" does not handle all boolean AND/OR/NAND/XOR and >steps-not-executed conditions. > Example? In particular, something that can be done with "COND=" but not "IF/THEN". >Let not those who cannot master playing the violin demand that the >violin be made more easy, but let them try playing the banjo instead. > Earl Scruggs might have taken offense at that. Do you regard the invention of the automatic transmission a mistake? I assume you don't own one. Abacus vs. calculator vs. computer? Luddite. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
Again and with all due respect, progress is made not by blunting the tool but by sharpening the user. "IF/THEN" does not handle all boolean AND/OR/NAND/XOR and steps-not-executed conditions. Let not those who cannot master playing the violin demand that the violin be made more easy, but let them try playing the banjo instead. And SMP/E? In the 1980's it was 'recommended' to use its dialogs. In the late 90's, its Custom-Pak etc. became 'de rigueur' and 'de facto'. And yet I continued to use only native SMP/E - and did so daily to track down and fix PTFEs etc. etc. Who gains from this progressive and continual stultification of mainframe systems programming? Is it not Windows for mainframes? As they say, "Use it or lose it." Cheers, Chris Poncelet (r) On 19/05/2021 01:55, Nash, Jonathan S. wrote: > Once I learned of the IF/THEN statements for > JCL I never used COND= again. IF/THEN is much > easier to use and to explain to new people. > I have seen many people code COND statements > incorrectly because they did not acually > understand how they worked. > > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of > CM Poncelet > Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 8:19 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies > > With all due respect, anyone who has difficulty coding JCL COND= > statements should consider *not* working with IBM mainframe systems. > > All boolean conditional execution steps can be handled using only COND= > statements. I submitted a paper on this & it was published in > "Computing" in 1989. I would but cannot attach it, as uploading PDF > files to this discussion list is not permitted. > > No sysprog worth his salt has ever had a problem with coding JCL COND= > statements. > > Likewise IF/THEN statements belong in "JCL for dummies" - as do symbols > in JCL and SYSIN. Ditto IF/THEN in assembler. > > Chris Poncelet (r) > > > . > On 18/05/2021 14:02, Charles Mills wrote: >> Yeah, and IF/THEN is slightly better than COND= >> >> Also symbols in SYSIN data. >> >> Charles >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On >> Behalf Of Steve Horein >> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 5:35 AM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies >> >> I would argue JCL got better when symbols were allowed! :-) >> https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.4.0?topic=es-symlist-parameter >> >> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:46 PM Charles Mills wrote: >> >>> Steve, let me wade in here and suggest some big picture. I think SHARE and >>> such is great for the details. >>> >>> What has changed since 2001? An idiosyncratic, IMHO list: >>> >>> - In 2001 SNA was yielding to TCP/IP. That transition has continued. An >>> awful lot of mainframe connectivity is now TCP/IP. Lots and lots of >>> Internet connectivity to the mainframe. >>> - Security is huge. Encryption is hot. Zero Trust is the buzzword of the >>> month. >>> - Everything is of course bigger. Z hardware goes up to what? 4TB real? >>> Someone will correct me if that is wrong. >>> - Tape drives have pretty much gone away. They live on as virtual, >>> emulated-on-DASD tape drives. >>> - The Cloud. Read any airline magazine for the latest. >>> - Remember VM? It was pretty moribund in 2001. It has found new life >>> hosting thousands of Linux instances. Yes, Linux running like a champ on Z >>> hardware. Mainframe Linux is huge. You can run Linux in a region of MVS in >>> a "container." >>> - Speaking of which, there is a Z box that will not IPL z/OS! It is called >>> Linux One. It's a mainframe with a bit hobbled somewhere such that >>> mainframe operating systems will not IPL, only Linux. >>> - Lots of new features in core MVS but you would fully recognize the >>> environment. If you sit down at a TSO/ISPF session it will seem like >>> nothing has changed. JCL has not gotten any better (or any worse, >>> thankfully). >>> - Remember the issue of "above the (24-bit) line"? It is still there, but >>> pretty much in the background. The new thing is data and execution "above >>> the (2GB/31-bit) bar." Lots of software products are exploiting data above >>> 2GB, and code can even run there, with lots of limitations. AMODE/RMODE 64. >>> - IBM JES3 is dead. Long live Phoenix JES3 plus. IBM ditched JES3, and >>> Phoenix picked it up. >>> - More emphasis on high level languages. Hardware design is being driven >>> by the Java folks and the compiler folks. Lots of new hardware >>> instructions. Hardware cycle times are not getting any faster, but >>> instructions do more per cycle. Caching getting more sophisticated and more >>> critical. The concept of "how long does an LR take" has totally >>> disappeared. It is a question with no answer other than "it depends." >>> >>> Anyone else want to weigh in? >>> >>> Charles >>> >>> >>> -Original Message- >>>
Re: JCL COND vs IF/THEN - Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies
Once I learned of the IF/THEN statements for JCL I never used COND= again. IF/THEN is much easier to use and to explain to new people. I have seen many people code COND statements incorrectly because they did not acually understand how they worked. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of CM Poncelet Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 8:19 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies With all due respect, anyone who has difficulty coding JCL COND= statements should consider *not* working with IBM mainframe systems. All boolean conditional execution steps can be handled using only COND= statements. I submitted a paper on this & it was published in "Computing" in 1989. I would but cannot attach it, as uploading PDF files to this discussion list is not permitted. No sysprog worth his salt has ever had a problem with coding JCL COND= statements. Likewise IF/THEN statements belong in "JCL for dummies" - as do symbols in JCL and SYSIN. Ditto IF/THEN in assembler. Chris Poncelet (r) . On 18/05/2021 14:02, Charles Mills wrote: > Yeah, and IF/THEN is slightly better than COND= > > Also symbols in SYSIN data. > > Charles > > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On > Behalf Of Steve Horein > Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 5:35 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies > > I would argue JCL got better when symbols were allowed! :-) > https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.4.0?topic=es-symlist-parameter > > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:46 PM Charles Mills wrote: > >> Steve, let me wade in here and suggest some big picture. I think SHARE and >> such is great for the details. >> >> What has changed since 2001? An idiosyncratic, IMHO list: >> >> - In 2001 SNA was yielding to TCP/IP. That transition has continued. An >> awful lot of mainframe connectivity is now TCP/IP. Lots and lots of >> Internet connectivity to the mainframe. >> - Security is huge. Encryption is hot. Zero Trust is the buzzword of the >> month. >> - Everything is of course bigger. Z hardware goes up to what? 4TB real? >> Someone will correct me if that is wrong. >> - Tape drives have pretty much gone away. They live on as virtual, >> emulated-on-DASD tape drives. >> - The Cloud. Read any airline magazine for the latest. >> - Remember VM? It was pretty moribund in 2001. It has found new life >> hosting thousands of Linux instances. Yes, Linux running like a champ on Z >> hardware. Mainframe Linux is huge. You can run Linux in a region of MVS in >> a "container." >> - Speaking of which, there is a Z box that will not IPL z/OS! It is called >> Linux One. It's a mainframe with a bit hobbled somewhere such that >> mainframe operating systems will not IPL, only Linux. >> - Lots of new features in core MVS but you would fully recognize the >> environment. If you sit down at a TSO/ISPF session it will seem like >> nothing has changed. JCL has not gotten any better (or any worse, >> thankfully). >> - Remember the issue of "above the (24-bit) line"? It is still there, but >> pretty much in the background. The new thing is data and execution "above >> the (2GB/31-bit) bar." Lots of software products are exploiting data above >> 2GB, and code can even run there, with lots of limitations. AMODE/RMODE 64. >> - IBM JES3 is dead. Long live Phoenix JES3 plus. IBM ditched JES3, and >> Phoenix picked it up. >> - More emphasis on high level languages. Hardware design is being driven >> by the Java folks and the compiler folks. Lots of new hardware >> instructions. Hardware cycle times are not getting any faster, but >> instructions do more per cycle. Caching getting more sophisticated and more >> critical. The concept of "how long does an LR take" has totally >> disappeared. It is a question with no answer other than "it depends." >> >> Anyone else want to weigh in? >> >> Charles >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On >> Behalf Of Gibney, Dave >> Sent: Monday, May 17, 2021 6:58 PM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies >> >> I would suggest SHARE presentations and perhaps Marna Walle's migration >> guides >> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On >>> Behalf Of Steve Estle >>> Sent: Monday, May 17, 2021 6:42 PM >>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >>> Subject: Best catch up resources for MVS / ZOS Technologies >>> >>> Hello Everyone in Mainframe Land, >>> >>> I've been out of the mainframe world since about 2001, but spent the >> prior >>> 20 years immersed in that world working with everything from MVS/370 to >>> MVS/ESA and VM, performance and capacity planning disciplines across a >>> variety of situations in the IT Services and consulting spaces. I, am, >> now as a >>> "IT Infrastructure
