John Eells (ee...@us.ibm.commailto:ee...@us.ibm.com) wrote:
I forwarded this on to the C compiler team, who retrieved your PMR from the
dusty archives and determined it was a Language Environment problem.
Apparently it got passed to them and they do see a problem, but
then...well...you know
Paul Gilmartin wrote, in part, re definitely not your father's IBM!:
That depends. Forty years ago, IBM could afford to be more arrogant.
They felt they were entitled to define or ignore the standards.
OK, but they didn't ignore things like this. You're taking my comment as a
unilateral older
On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 06:53:03 -0800, Phil Smith wrote:
The most egregious old-time incident I remember is a time when the doc for
something said all and the Change Team was claiming that in this one case
that didn't apply. I found myself saying, 'ALL' means ALL! and then
wondering why I had to
The full text was This command lists all files that it lists.
g
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Phil Smith
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2015 12:16 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RCF vs. COMMENT
Paul Gilmartin wrote, re all means all:
One might make a similar assertion about ANY. But, in fact, AMODE(ANY)
doesn't
mean ANY, and few complain.
Yeah, I don't remember the exact context, but it was clearly inclusive,
something as simple as This command lists all files... - that doesn't get
I forwarded this on to the C compiler team, who retrieved your PMR from
the dusty archives and determined it was a Language Environment problem.
Apparently it got passed to them and they do see a problem, but
then...well...you know what happened in the end, and I think the
contributing
On Thu, 19 Feb 2015 08:51:35 -0500, John Eells wrote:
I forwarded this on to the C compiler team, who retrieved your PMR from
the dusty archives and determined it was a Language Environment problem.
...
In any event, the Language Environment guys are a bit horrified that
this happened.
Sounds
Paul Gilmartin wrote:
They say is has been accepted as a clarification. They've not
provided details in response to a followup request.)
Hey, at least you got that muchI opened a SEV2 against a math function in C
that was returning incorrout on true 64-bit values (i.e., values where the
On Feb 17, 2015, at 8:12 AM, Phil Smith III wrote:
Paul Gilmartin wrote:
They say is has been accepted as a clarification. They've not
provided details in response to a followup request.)
Hey, at least you got that much—I opened a SEV2 against a math
function in C
that was returning
On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 08:28:39 -0700, Lizette Koehler wrote:
Though I am not a fan of Knowledge Center, the one element they provided is
the ability to ADD COMMENTs to the section. If you feel it is lacking
details, you should be able to supply additional comments.
I've done that, at times.
Paul Gilmartin wrote:
Lizette Koehler wrote:
Though I am not a fan of Knowledge Center, the one element they provided is
the ability to ADD COMMENTs to the section. If you feel it is lacking
details, you should be able to supply additional comments.
I wish that in such cases IBM Pubs itself
11 matches
Mail list logo
