Well ... subject to interpretation. For example, DOS was a lot closer to
the *original* (pre-ESA) ISPF than Microsoft Windows ever was - and DOS
was also far more efficient. The performance problems with ISPF began
post-XA with the introduction of ESA. The purpose of ESA was to allow
IBM to
In 503ba219.7000...@bcs.org.uk, on 08/27/2012
at 05:36 PM, CM Poncelet ponce...@bcs.org.uk said:
Well ... subject to interpretation. For example, DOS was a lot closer
to the *original* (pre-ESA) ISPF than Microsoft Windows ever was
Neither looked anything like ISPF, or even like the original
In 50382f4e.6000...@bcs.org.uk, on 08/25/2012
at 02:50 AM, CM Poncelet ponce...@bcs.org.uk said:
As your interpretation seems to be the only one that matters
How is that not a lie?
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2http://patriot.net/~shmuel
We don't
In 503996a6.8030...@bcs.org.uk, on 08/26/2012
at 04:23 AM, CM Poncelet ponce...@bcs.org.uk said:
What's your problem, Metz?
Dealing with hypocritical fools.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2http://patriot.net/~shmuel
We don't care. We don't have to care,
On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
shmuel+...@patriot.net wrote:
In 503996a6.8030...@bcs.org.uk, on 08/26/2012
at 04:23 AM, CM Poncelet ponce...@bcs.org.uk said:
What's your problem, Metz?
Dealing with hypocritical fools.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ivUOnnstpg
What's your problem, Metz? Run out of words? I'll see you later, pussy.
Eternity might be a long time, but I'm infinitely patient. Ta ta for now
CM Poncelet wrote:
Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
In 50361ac9.1080...@bcs.org.uk, on 08/23/2012
at 12:58 PM, CM Poncelet ponce...@bcs.org.uk
Tut tut. Not a mention of 'using a search engine' in my quoted reply. In
fact, I use them regularly. You seem confused.
Meanwhile, Germany's economy is thriving while Greece's one is on its
knees. The former relies on science/engineering, the latter on
art/entertainment (and on hanging dogs
But 'search engines' are for entertainment purposes - an industry runs on
science and engineering, not art and entertainment.
Wow, is this some kind of alternate universe thing?
Date:Wed, 22 Aug 2012 08:22:17 +0100
From:CM Poncelet ponce...@bcs.org.uk
Subject: Re: ISPF Panel and LPAR
universe thing?
Date:Wed, 22 Aug 2012 08:22:17 +0100
From:CM Poncelet ponce...@bcs.org.uk
Subject: Re: ISPF Panel and LPAR name
... because it is moving back towards suppressing intelligence (as Mao
Tse Tung did in China, in the 1960s). We should not all be obliged to
look at pictures just
Solomon's Book of Proverbs, chapter 26 verse 5
Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
In 50342f7d.6030...@bcs.org.uk, on 08/22/2012
at 02:01 AM, CM Poncelet ponce...@bcs.org.uk said:
Is that so?
Yes, they know what they are doing and why.
In 645893134704.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu, on
08/22/2012
at 09:36 AM, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com said:
But isn't ISPF itself a large step moving TSO in the direction of
what Windows later became?
No.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2
In
offadfa57b.19e8601a-on85257a62.0050ea48-85257a62.0051d...@tsys.com,
on 08/22/2012
at 10:54 AM, Kirk Talman rkueb...@tsys.com said:
More accurately a session manager is Windows for z/OS.
Not even close. While I have had issues with TPX, the comparison is
still insulting.
--
Shmuel
In 50359f17.2080...@bcs.org.uk, on 08/23/2012
at 04:10 AM, CM Poncelet ponce...@bcs.org.uk said:
Well ... art/entertainment v. science/engineering as in Aesop's
fable about the Cicala and the Ant. Industry makes its own bread:
it does not sing all summer and expect bread when winter arrives.
In 50361ac9.1080...@bcs.org.uk, on 08/23/2012
at 12:58 PM, CM Poncelet ponce...@bcs.org.uk said:
Solomon's Book of Proverbs, chapter 26 verse 5
Ah, the Devil quoting scripture.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2http://patriot.net/~shmuel
We don't care. We
... because it is moving back towards suppressing intelligence (as Mao
Tse Tung did in China, in the 1960s). We should not all be obliged to
look at pictures just because the majority of people cannot read.
Yes, I understand the usefulness of Google's query completion etc. But
'search
In 50342f7d.6030...@bcs.org.uk, on 08/22/2012
at 02:01 AM, CM Poncelet ponce...@bcs.org.uk said:
Is that so?
Yes, they know what they are doing and why.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2http://patriot.net/~shmuel
We don't care. We don't have to care,
ISPF _is_ Windows for z/OS.
On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 08:22:17 +0100, CM Poncelet wrote:
... because it is moving back towards suppressing intelligence (as Mao
Tse Tung did in China, in the 1960s). We should not all be obliged to
look at pictures just because the majority of people cannot read.
But
: ponce...@bcs.org.uk
Subject: Re: ISPF Panel and LPAR name
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
... because it is moving back towards suppressing intelligence (as Mao
Tse Tung did in China, in the 1960s). We should not all be obliged to
look at pictures just because the majority of people cannot read
On 8/22/2012 at 03:22 AM, CM Poncelet ponce...@bcs.org.uk wrote:
Yes, I understand the usefulness of Google's query completion etc. But
'search engines' are for entertainment purposes - and industry runs on
science and engineering, not art and entertainment.
What a severely limited
Can I throw away my keyboard and use only my mouse?
On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 11:02:36 -0400, Dave Salt wrote:
Paul Gilmartin wrote:
I love Google's query completion. And it would be a good thing
if ISPF were to do similarly on every panel which allows a data set name to
be typed. I suspect
Dave S.
As long as you always have a GUI on screen keyboard. Heck, get an
iPad or touch screen device and throw away the mouse too.
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 5:51 PM, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com wrote:
Can I throw away my keyboard and use only my mouse?
On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 11:02:36 -0400, Dave
[mailto:IBM-
m...@listserv.ua.edu]
On Behalf Of CM Poncelet
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2012 10:57 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: ISPF Panel and LPAR name
Batch Clist/REXX does not use panels. They are intended for
*interactive* TSO/ISPF dialogs. Anyone who writes Clist/REXX
From: ds...@hotmail.com
ISPF already supports auto-completion of data set names (kinda sorta), but
it's extremely clunky.
Better and easier to use SimpList and not have to type anything at all.
From: paulgboul...@aim.com
Can I throw away my keyboard and use only my mouse?
It's very
From: ponce...@bcs.org.uk
Anyone who writes Clist/REXX that invokes panels in batch doesn't have a clue
about what he/she/it is doing.
The company I worked for had a vendor product (Endevor) that performed various
functions using ISPF panels. Management wanted some of the functions to be
Subject: Re: ISPF Panel and LPAR name
Batch Clist/REXX does not use panels. They are intended for
*interactive* TSO/ISPF dialogs. Anyone who writes Clist/REXX that
invokes panels in batch doesn't have a clue about what he/she/it is
doing.
BTW Beware of embedded LIBDEFs in Clist/REXX. Code
In 6419321491215114.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu, on
08/20/2012
at 07:57 AM, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com said:
There are contrary valid points of view here:
Perhaps on what is desirable, but the behavior of the ISPF code is a
matter of fact.
o Not to require the programmer
Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
Batch Clist/REXX does not use panels.
Foreground Clist/REXX does not use panels.
True, but see below.
Both batch and foreground scripts called from ISPF can use ISPF services,
including panels.
Fact is - both are, like you say, using services (including,
Panel and LPAR name
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
On Tue, 21 Aug 2012 02:43:58 -0400, Dave Salt wrote:
From: ponce...@bcs.org.uk
Anyone who writes Clist/REXX that invokes panels in batch doesn't have a
clue about what he/she/it is doing.
... I customized the panels to recognize
Is that so?
Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
In 50332317.4040...@bcs.org.uk, on 08/21/2012
at 06:56 AM, CM Poncelet ponce...@bcs.org.uk said:
Batch Clist/REXX does not use panels.
Foreground Clist/REXX does not use panels.
Both batch and foreground scripts called from ISPF can
IBM have recognized that 99% of users are computer illiterate, but have
99% of the money. So they are following Microsoft's 'lead' and,
step-by-step, implementing Windoze for mainframes. Other vendors are
just following suit. But the remaining 1% of users (with 1% of the
money) can still
On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 04:57:25 +0100, CM Poncelet wrote:
IBM have recognized that 99% of users are computer illiterate, but have
99% of the money. So they are following Microsoft's 'lead' and,
step-by-step, implementing Windoze for mainframes.
And this, were it to happen, would be entirely a Bad
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: ISPF Panel and LPAR name
Batch Clist/REXX does not use panels. They are intended for
*interactive* TSO/ISPF dialogs. Anyone who writes Clist/REXX that
invokes panels in batch doesn't have a clue about what he/she/it is
doing.
BTW Beware of embedded LIBDEFs
, August 20, 2012 4:02 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: ISPF Panel and LPAR name
Gosh.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 02:01:57 +0100, CM Poncelet wrote:
Gosh.
The ISPPLIB DD must be allocated in the JCL.
No; a dynamic allocation before ISPSTART will work just as well.
There are contrary valid points of view here:
o Not to require the programmer to provide resources he doesn't
intend to
In
of1a25d1f0.ca6c550d-on88257a5d.0014c951-88257a5d.00157...@sce.com,
on 08/16/2012
at 08:54 PM, Skip Robinson jo.skip.robin...@sce.com said:
IIRC ISPF in batch requires all the standard DD
allocations or it just won't work at all. Period.
Yes, except that they can be dynamic rather than
Use VPUT to save in your REXX exec; use VGET to retrieve in your
panel )INIT section.
If the same rexx script then does an ISPEXEC DISPLAY, the VPUT is not
needed. ISPF will find the variable in the rexx's function pool.
If you want to display the value in other panels not displayed from this
In 7695765772818059.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu, on
08/15/2012
at 06:37 PM, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com said:
Do batch ISPF jobs use panels?
Yes.
How,
By specifying the panel on the ISPSTART.
and is it necessary?
Yes.
It seems almost a contradiction in terms.
No.
-Manager
626-302-7535 Office
323-715-0595 Mobile
jo.skip.robin...@sce.com
From: Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) shmuel+...@patriot.net
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date: 08/16/2012 05:45 PM
Subject:Re: ISPF Panel and LPAR name
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN
323-715-0595 Mobile
jo.skip.robin...@sce.com
From: Art Gutowski arthur.gutow...@compuware.com
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date: 08/15/2012 11:18 AM
Subject:Re: ISPF Panel and LPAR name
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
On Wed, 15 Aug 2012 12
Co-Manager
626-302-7535 Office
323-715-0595 Mobile
jo.skip.robin...@sce.com
From: Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date: 08/15/2012 04:37 PM
Subject:Re: ISPF Panel and LPAR name
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
On Wed, 15 Aug 2012 17:15:21 -0700, Skip Robinson wrote:
I didn't know you allocate ISPPROF to DUMMY in batch. I've always used a
temporary data set to achieve the same goals.
//ISPPROF DD SPACE=(TRK,(1,1,2)),UNIT=SYSALLDA,DCB=SYS1.PROCLIB
I stand corrected; I just reviewed my own code.
Why not use the ISPF var for LPAR? It is SYSZNODE, SYSZPLEX, I think.
If you have not done so, there is an ISPF Newsgroup that is probably a good
place to ask these types of questions.
Lizette
-Original Message-
From: Pesce, Andy andy.pe...@autozone.com
Sent: Aug 14, 2012 11:47 AM
Oh, forgot one - ZSYSID
Lizette
-Original Message-
From: Pesce, Andy andy.pe...@autozone.com
Sent: Aug 14, 2012 11:47 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: ISPF Panel and LPAR name
I have a primary option menu (ISR@PRIM) that I am trying to put the LPAR
NAME on it instead of the
43 matches
Mail list logo
