WTO is a lazy way to write something without all those OPEN/WRITE/PUT/CLOSE
macros. ;-)
WTO / WTOR is the means to communicate with the operator, either human or
automated. The system provides that communication path. It does not need an
setup on the program / JCL side. It should not be
Hunkeler, Peter wrote:
WTO is a lazy way to write something without all those OPEN/WRITE/PUT/CLOSE
macros. ;-)
Did you see my smiley? ;-)
Really, when I write a brand new program, I sometimes use WTO for debugging
purposes during development, say for example, to see whether a branch or
File 127 at cbttape.org contains a handy macro named SYSPUT.
Just code the macro in your working storage; then when you want to write a line;
load the address of the line in R1 and BAL R14 to the macro tag.
The specified dcb (automagically defined within the macro) is opened at first
use.
The
Thanks all...I will consider doing it right. At the very least, I'll stop
looking for another way!
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 7:12 AM, Tim Deller ists...@bonton.com wrote:
File 127 at cbttape.org contains a handy macro named SYSPUT.
Just code the macro in your working storage; then when you want
I’m missing something here (as usual). Assembler program, running in Batch,
wants to write a message to the job log. I’m doing WTO with ROUTCDE=11,
which puts the message in the JESMSGLG. Is that my only real option? Seems
like it should be easy to write to SYSPRINT, but I can’t find a way to do
Subject: WTO confusion
I'm missing something here (as usual). Assembler program, running in Batch,
wants to write a message to the job log. I'm doing WTO with ROUTCDE=11, which
puts the message in the JESMSGLG. Is that my only real option? Seems like it
should be easy to write to SYSPRINT, but I
zMan, did you look at the WTL macro ?
Scott ford
www.identityforge.com
from my IPAD
'Infinite wisdom through infinite means'
On Dec 19, 2013, at 6:41 PM, zMan zedgarhoo...@gmail.com wrote:
I’m missing something here (as usual). Assembler program, running in Batch,
wants to write a message
WTL won't help either. It's just a more specific form of WTO.
Jon Perryman.
From: Scott Ford scott_j_f...@yahoo.com
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 4:16 PM
Subject: Re: WTO confusion
zMan, did you look at the WTL macro
.
Jon Perryman.
From: Scott Ford scott_j_f...@yahoo.com
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 4:16 PM
Subject: Re: WTO confusion
zMan, did you look at the WTL macro ?
Scott ford
www.identityforge.com
from my IPAD
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:41 PM, zMan zedgarhoo...@gmail.com wrote:
I’m missing something here (as usual). Assembler program, running in Batch,
wants to write a message to the job log. I’m doing WTO with ROUTCDE=11,
which puts the message in the JESMSGLG. Is that my only real option? Seems
: Thursday, December 19, 2013 6:42 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: WTO confusion
I'm missing something here (as usual). Assembler program, running in Batch,
wants to write a message to the job log. I'm doing WTO with ROUTCDE=11,
which puts the message in the JESMSGLG. Is that my only real
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 8:17 PM, Charles Mills charl...@mcn.org wrote:
It's a crazy shortcoming of z/OS and why the console is littered with
OPENING MASTER INPUT FILE messages: way easier to write a message to the
console than to SYSPRINT.
Too bad HLASM did not include some of the ASSIST
@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: WTO confusion
I'm missing something here (as usual). Assembler program, running
in Batch,
wants to write a message to the job log. I'm doing WTO with
ROUTCDE=11,
which puts the message in the JESMSGLG. Is that my only real
option? Seems
like it should be easy to write
zMan wrote:
Assembler program, running in Batch, wants to write a message to the job log.
I'm doing WTO with ROUTCDE=11, which puts the message in the JESMSGLG. Is that
my only real option? Seems like it should be easy to write to SYSPRINT, but I
can't find a way to do that!
Neither me, but
14 matches
Mail list logo
