Re: another question about TSO edit command
In 1407618715.59367.yahoomail...@web181002.mail.ne1.yahoo.com, on 08/09/2014 at 02:11 PM, Jon Perryman jperr...@pacbell.net said: What makes a fullscreen editor not a line mode editor? That you can't use it from a line-mode session. These days those are few and far between, but log on to TSO with TELNET (NVT, not TN3270) and try using ISPF. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
In 9036367415583024.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu, on 08/09/2014 at 04:16 PM, Paul Gilmartin 000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu said: I suppose it's unfortunate that checking the return code is part of the macro language rather than of the host environment. Au contraire, it's fortunate. Anybody coding an edit macro is likely to need feedback from subcommands. I place a premium on economy of keystrokes and hand motion. Use vi. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014 09:35:52 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: on 08/09/2014 at 04:16 PM, Paul Gilmartin said: I suppose it's unfortunate that checking the return code is part of the macro language rather than of the host environment. Au contraire, it's fortunate. Anybody coding an edit macro is likely to need feedback from subcommands. Surely one action choice might be to set the return code passed to the macro processor. But that shouldn't be the default, in deference to those who have expressed a phobia of performing a destructive action in a macro after a failed search. I place a premium on economy of keystrokes and hand motion. Use vi. I had that in mind. I do; with my data sets NFS-mounted to Solaris. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 8:35 AM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote: snip I place a premium on economy of keystrokes and hand motion. Use vi. I have read of a professional author who uses ed on Linux for the initial writing of all his books. He just types in paragraph after paragraph, separated by two enter keystrokes. For writing, this seems like an excellent choice. It goes with what my creative writing teacher in High School said: Just let the words flow out, edit later. Not so useful for coding, especially in languages which are column oriented such as COBOL and Python. Really great for obfuscated C code, though. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- There is nothing more pleasant than traveling and meeting new people! Genghis Khan Maranatha! John McKown -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
And in terms of data streams (Multi)Markdown is very much like that; The markup doesn't get in the way. So I use it for much of my writing. Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker From: John McKown john.archie.mck...@gmail.com To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu Date: 11/08/2014 16:32 Subject:Re: another question about TSO edit command Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 8:35 AM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote: snip I place a premium on economy of keystrokes and hand motion. Use vi. I have read of a professional author who uses ed on Linux for the initial writing of all his books. He just types in paragraph after paragraph, separated by two enter keystrokes. For writing, this seems like an excellent choice. It goes with what my creative writing teacher in High School said: Just let the words flow out, edit later. Not so useful for coding, especially in languages which are column oriented such as COBOL and Python. Really great for obfuscated C code, though. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- There is nothing more pleasant than traveling and meeting new people! Genghis Khan Maranatha! John McKown -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
In 1407629103.3949.yahoomail...@web181001.mail.ne1.yahoo.com, on 08/09/2014 at 05:05 PM, Jon Perryman jperr...@pacbell.net said: Would you use the Emacs editor outside x-windows? ObPedant Yes. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
In 53e72afc.5090...@kabelmail.de, on 08/10/2014 at 10:19 AM, Arthur Fichtl fich...@kabelmail.de said: I know, this is an issue to be discussed rather in ISPF-L It's on topic here, but there might be ISPF folks who don't read IBM-MAIN regularly. What I'm really missing in ISPF edit Can you work up a business case and submit a requirement to IBM? ·A command to convert special lines (like notelines) to datalines. Do you mean an EDIT macro command that is equivalent to the MD line command? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
In 4867121587620348.wa.bgodfrey.gzgmail@listserv.ua.edu, on 08/09/2014 at 08:55 PM, Bill Godfrey bgodfrey...@gmail.com said: Back in the 80's I worked at a place that had an IBM 7171 ASCII Device Attachment Control Unit, to which we could connect terminals like VT100's and, ISTR, a line from a modem to which a PC running a VT100 emulator could dial in, logon, and use ISPF. A session with a 3270 display protocol converter is not line mode. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
I know, this is an issue to be discussed rather in ISPF-L than here, but i assume that all folks here are using ISPF intensively as well. What I'm really missing in ISPF edit (since I had a task that would have been solved smartly in this way) are these 2 features: ·A REDISPLAY/REFRESH command in edit macros and ·A command to convert special lines (like notelines) to datalines. At present we are running z/OS 1.13 but when reading the ISPF-docs for 2.1 I could not find any hint in this direction. Arthur -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
On 8/10/2014 2:19 AM, Arthur Fichtl wrote: I know, this is an issue to be discussed rather in ISPF-L than here, but i assume that all folks here are using ISPF intensively as well. What I'm really missing in ISPF edit (since I had a task that would have been solved smartly in this way) are these 2 features: ·A REDISPLAY/REFRESH command in edit macros and not sure what you mean / what you want by that ·A command to convert special lines (like notelines) to datalines. the line command MD does that, and has for many years At present we are running z/OS 1.13 but when reading the ISPF-docs for 2.1 I could not find any hint in this direction. Arthur -Steve Comstock -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
For edit macro's, placing the cursor at the end risks far less data than leaving the cursor alone. Right or wrong is a matter of opinion. Leaving the cursor at the current location will certainly teach programmers to check return codes and not make false assumptions the first time they destroy their data because they didn't check the return code. Jon Perryman. On Saturday, August 2, 2014 6:36 AM, Paul Gilmartin 000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu wrote: On Sat, 2 Aug 2014 12:47:23 +0200, Arthur Fichtl wrote: ... a well-behaved editor should leave the file position unchanged. I disagree, although having an option would be more user friendly, as would optional first and last operands on FIND. Additionally to Pauls' remark let me point to the powerful Macro Facility of ISPF EDIT. You can easliy -if you want- create a personal, let's say XFIND, command, that remembers the cursor position and stays on the last found line in case no further hits are found. ??? Why a macro? In my experience the native behavior of ISPF EDIT is to leave the cursor position unchanged when no further hit is found. (And I prefer unchanged over last found line for the cases when the cursor was most recently positioned by other than a FIND command.) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
What makes a fullscreen editor not a line mode editor? I can't think of any ISPF edit commands that require full screen features other than entering the command thru the command area in the screen. Granted, the full screen features make life easier and the command area is very small. Jon Perryman On Saturday, August 2, 2014 6:42 PM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote: In 7830856811578828.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu, on 08/01/2014 at 02:10 PM, Paul Gilmartin 000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu said: So can one use ISPF Edit in line mode? No, AFAIK, but one can drive it with a macro. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
On Sat, 9 Aug 2014 13:29:32 -0700, Jon Perryman wrote: For edit macro's, placing the cursor at the end risks far less data than leaving the cursor alone. Right or wrong is a matter of opinion. Leaving the cursor at the current location will certainly teach programmers to check return codes and not make false assumptions the first time they destroy their data because they didn't check the return code. A nonsensical argument. Carrying that reasoning to the extreme, the safest thing to do on an unsuccessful search is to Cancel the edit session leaving the file unchanged and data intact. I suppose it's unfortunate that checking the return code is part of the macro language rather than of the host environment. Otherwise Edit could abort the macro if it issued another command without extracting the return code. (I'd imagine some syntax such as: FIND Target Failure=failure-option ... where the default failure-option is CANCEL.) And what you consider proper for a macro, I consider improper for interactive editing. For interactive editing, I place a premium on economy of keystrokes and hand motion. For example, ISPF Edit requires six keystrokes to search for a comma; another editor I use needs only three. (To be fair, each requires four to search for a period.) And rodent-oriented editors that pop up a dialog box to do a search are dreadful. Forget Case Insensitive Disambiguating Tables; forget lexical separation. I'd welcome: Instead of the terse f 'Foo Bar'ENTER fFoo BarENTER f c'Foo Bar'ENTERFFoo BarENTER (f means case-insensitive search; F case-sensitive.) Interactive editing commands are not code; self-documentation and comments are counterproductive; it's a motor skill. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
On Sat, 9 Aug 2014 14:11:55 -0700, Jon Perryman wrote: What makes a fullscreen editor not a line mode editor? I can't think of any ISPF edit commands that require full screen features other than entering the command thru the command area in the screen. Granted, the full screen features make life easier and the command area is very small.� Imagine I have a VT-100-type TELNET TSO session. Can I use ISPF Edit, however cumbersomely in that session? (Very hypothetical; kinda like enumerating and contrasting the different ways to clear a register in assembler code, frequently discussed in these fora.) -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
Just because you don't understand or can't imagine it's importance doesn't make it non-sense. TSO edit has a batch mode without the need for a macro language so you can't even check return codes. Yes they could have taken it to the extreme but being extreme is not acceptable. In the MVS world, we often make a compromise between what's acceptable and what should be the default. As for imagining a syntax, are you implying that IBM could have easily resolved this issue. To you this is a simple change, Thankfully that's not how IBM operates and they consider the true impact. What is the effect in batch mode? What happens to commands in the queue? What happens to command in SYSTSIN. Do you flush to the next END statement? Has that END statement? If running a macro, has it generated the END statement or should we start flushing SYSTSIN? Does it flush SYSTSIN get flushed? Does it honor END parms? Will these changes affect existing users? As for saving keystrokes at the expense of everything else, that is typical UNIX. We in the MVS world consider the whole picture Consistency between macro versus interactive. Compare benefits of brevity versus impact on all users (casual versus heavy). Jon Perryman On Saturday, August 9, 2014 2:16 PM, Paul Gilmartin 000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu wrote: On Sat, 9 Aug 2014 13:29:32 -0700, Jon Perryman wrote: For edit macro's, placing the cursor at the end risks far less data than leaving the cursor alone. Right or wrong is a matter of opinion. Leaving the cursor at the current location will certainly teach programmers to check return codes and not make false assumptions the first time they destroy their data because they didn't check the return code. A nonsensical argument. Carrying that reasoning to the extreme, the safest thing to do on an unsuccessful search is to Cancel the edit session leaving the file unchanged and data intact. I suppose it's unfortunate that checking the return code is part of the macro language rather than of the host environment. Otherwise Edit could abort the macro if it issued another command without extracting the return code. (I'd imagine some syntax such as: FIND Target Failure=failure-option ... where the default failure-option is CANCEL.) And what you consider proper for a macro, I consider improper for interactive editing. For interactive editing, I place a premium on economy of keystrokes and hand motion. For example, ISPF Edit requires six keystrokes to search for a comma; another editor I use needs only three. (To be fair, each requires four to search for a period.) And rodent-oriented editors that pop up a dialog box to do a search are dreadful. Forget Case Insensitive Disambiguating Tables; forget lexical separation. I'd welcome: Instead of the terse f 'Foo Bar'ENTER fFoo BarENTER f c'Foo Bar'ENTER FFoo BarENTER (f means case-insensitive search; F case-sensitive.) Interactive editing commands are not code; self-documentation and comments are counterproductive; it's a motor skill. -- 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: another question about TSO edit command
Lets stop trying to imagine. In what universe does ISPF (not edit) support line mode terminals. Would you use the Emacs editor outside x-windows? If you can make ISPF support line mode, then edit will automatically have line mode capability. Jon Perryman On Saturday, August 9, 2014 2:22 PM, Paul Gilmartin 000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu wrote: On Sat, 9 Aug 2014 14:11:55 -0700, Jon Perryman wrote: What makes a fullscreen editor not a line mode editor? I can't think of any ISPF edit commands that require full screen features other than entering the command thru the command area in the screen. Granted, the full screen features make life easier and the command area is very small.� Imagine I have a VT-100-type TELNET TSO session. Can I use ISPF Edit, however cumbersomely in that session? (Very hypothetical; kinda like enumerating and contrasting the different ways to clear a register in assembler code, frequently discussed in these fora.) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
Gil: No. ISPF is 3270 device dependent. Ed On Aug 9, 2014, at 4:22 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote: On Sat, 9 Aug 2014 14:11:55 -0700, Jon Perryman wrote: What makes a fullscreen editor not a line mode editor? I can't think of any ISPF edit commands that require full screen features other than entering the command thru the command area in the screen. Granted, the full screen features make life easier and the command area is very small.� Imagine I have a VT-100-type TELNET TSO session. Can I use ISPF Edit, however cumbersomely in that session? (Very hypothetical; kinda like enumerating and contrasting the different ways to clear a register in assembler code, frequently discussed in these fora.) -- 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: another question about TSO edit command
On Sat, 9 Aug 2014 16:22:11 -0500, Paul Gilmartin wrote: On Sat, 9 Aug 2014 14:11:55 -0700, Jon Perryman wrote: What makes a fullscreen editor not a line mode editor? I can't think of any ISPF edit commands that require full screen features other than entering the command thru the command area in the screen. Granted, the full screen features make life easier and the command area is very small. Imagine I have a VT-100-type TELNET TSO session. Can I use ISPF Edit, however cumbersomely in that session? (Very hypothetical; kinda like enumerating and contrasting the different ways to clear a register in assembler code, frequently discussed in these fora.) Back in the 80's I worked at a place that had an IBM 7171 ASCII Device Attachment Control Unit, to which we could connect terminals like VT100's and, ISTR, a line from a modem to which a PC running a VT100 emulator could dial in, logon, and use ISPF. From a bitsavers manual: The IBM 7171 also provides ASCII to IBM 3270 protocol conversion. The IBM 7171 appears to the host processor as one or two IBM 3274 model1D control units. The attached ASCII display terminals and printers appear to the host system as IBM 3278 or 3277 terminals and IBM 3286 printers. IBM 3270 emulation allows the IBM 7171 attached devices to communicate with IBM interactive packages while utilizing existing 3270 programs with no host modification required. IBM 3270 emulation extends the capabilities of the ASCII device by providing 3270 type functions. Bill -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
On Sat, 9 Aug 2014 19:55:03 -0500, Ed Gould wrote: No. ISPF is 3270 device dependent. I have used ISPF in background, with no 3270 attached. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
You probably have used PDF which is/was a companion product, ie not use fullscreen capabilities. Ed On Aug 9, 2014, at 11:20 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote: On Sat, 9 Aug 2014 19:55:03 -0500, Ed Gould wrote: No. ISPF is 3270 device dependent. I have used ISPF in background, with no 3270 attached. -- 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: another question about TSO edit command
In 53dcc1bb.9060...@kabelmail.de, on 08/02/2014 at 12:47 PM, Arthur Fichtl fich...@kabelmail.de said: Additionally to Pauls' remark let me point to the powerful Macro Facility of ISPF EDIT. Any decent editor has a macro facility, including TSO EDIT. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
In 5806560905395444.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu, on 08/02/2014 at 08:36 AM, Paul Gilmartin 000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu said: (Why doesn't your Reply facility distinguish quoted text!? Finger check. I had become slightly familiar with ISPF EDIT before I encountered XEDIT. When I have ISPF/PDF EDIT I miss XEDIT; when I have XEDIT I miss ISPF/SPF EDIT. Each has its good point, and you have to carve the bird at its joints. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
In 7049601809533283.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu, on 08/02/2014 at 09:14 PM, Paul Gilmartin 000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu said: But ISPF edit behaves better. Yes, but I can do things with TSO EDIT that I can't do with ISPF/PDF EDIT. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
In6487334105557425.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu, on 07/30/2014 at 06:40 PM, Paul Gilmartin 000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu said: That is one of the dumbest, most hostile behaviors I have ever seen in an editor (but TSO edit isn't unique here). If I do a find and get no hits (very possibly because I mistyped the search target) a well-behaved editor should leave the file position unchanged. I disagree, although having an option would be more user friendly, as would optional first and last operands on FIND. Additionally to Pauls' remark let me point to the powerful Macro Facility of ISPF EDIT. You can easliy -if you want- create a personal, let's say XFIND, command, that remembers the cursor position and stays on the last found line in case no further hits are found. Arthur -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
Arthur Fichtl has made a very important point. The world is what it is; and systems behave as they behave, distressing some and pleasing others. Macro facilities can be used to mitigate, even eliminate such perceived deficiencies. In particular, Paul Gilmartin can have something closer to his heart's desire without depriving others of behavior they prefer, perhaps only because it is what they are accustomed to. The notion that things can function as we would wish ab initio, out of the box, and without programming, is a naif, utopian one. Worse, it is certainly chimerical. None of us can have things the way we want them all or even most of the time because others want them different. The best we can hope for is a set of primitives, building blocks, that is complete in the sense that they can be used together to build much more complex, disparate facilities. They and their completeness; not lamentation about the notional inadequacies of others' designs, should be the focus of our attention. John Gilmore, Ashland, MA 01721 - USA -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
On Sat, 2 Aug 2014 12:47:23 +0200, Arthur Fichtl wrote: ... a well-behaved editor should leave the file position unchanged. I disagree, although having an option would be more user friendly, as would optional first and last operands on FIND. (Why doesn't your Reply facility distinguish quoted text!? I suppose this is YA matter of personal preference.) Additionally to Pauls' remark let me point to the powerful Macro Facility of ISPF EDIT. You can easliy -if you want- create a personal, let's say XFIND, command, that remembers the cursor position and stays on the last found line in case no further hits are found. ??? Why a macro? In my experience the native behavior of ISPF EDIT is to leave the cursor position unchanged when no further hit is found. (And I prefer unchanged over last found line for the cases when the cursor was most recently positioned by other than a FIND command.) On Sat, 2 Aug 2014 07:49:52 -0400, John Gilmore wrote: The best we can hope for is a set of primitives, building blocks, that is complete in the sense that they can be used together to build much more complex, disparate facilities. They and their completeness; not lamentation about the notional inadequacies of others' designs, should be the focus of our attention. I had become slightly familiar with ISPF EDIT before I encountered XEDIT. Then I found it particularly irritating that XEDIT always scrolls the view to position the located target on a fixed screen line (even though that can be configured). I wrote a set of macros to emulate the ISPF behavior. Looking back, it was a mistake -- the ROI never offset the resource used. Worse yet, development by the vendor has modified the primitives so my macros no longer work as designed. The primitives were inadequate. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
On Sat, 2 Aug 2014 08:36:30 -0500, Paul Gilmartin wrote: Worse yet, development by the vendor has modified the primitives so my macros no longer work as designed. The primitives were inadequate. An inherent limitation of macros. I have never been enamoured by ISPF edit macros. A plugin API would be nice - but then we'd need some decent scripting language(s). Dave, where's that lua port ;o) Shane ... -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
In 7830856811578828.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu, on 08/01/2014 at 02:10 PM, Paul Gilmartin 000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu said: What does repeat FIND do once you're at the end of the file? I just noticed this: If you do not specify any operands, the operands you specified last with FIND are used. The search for the specified string begins at the line following the current line. If you issue the TOP subcommand, the search for the specified string begins with the second line of the data set. Second? Boo! Too bad that TSO EDIT is functionally stabilized. So can one use ISPF Edit in line mode? No, AFAIK, but one can drive it with a macro. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
On Sat, 2 Aug 2014 21:21:08 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: What does repeat FIND do once you're at the end of the file? I just noticed this: If you do not specify any operands, the operands you specified last with FIND are used. The search for the specified string begins at the line following the current line. If you issue the TOP subcommand, the search for the specified string begins with the second line of the data set. Second? Boo! Slavish adherence to specifications. Probably: o Repeat Find makes current the next line after the current whch contains the target. o TOP makes the first line current. You're already there. Searching the current line and going there again would be a no-op. (I once knew a college dormitory elevator which, if one pressed the button for the current floor and hopped out before the door closed, became catatonic, requiring a service call. Similar phenomenon.) Too bad that TSO EDIT is functionally stabilized. But ISPF edit behaves better. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
In 8e4663db4b0d43518fbb6345aa417...@dm2pr08mb720.namprd08.prod.outlook.com, on 07/30/2014 at 09:44 PM, John Norgauer jcnorga...@ucdavis.edu said: But when I get data with no line numbers, my commands are not working. What gives you that idea? Read the manual more carefully. ,EDIT, f STC == Try inserting a TOP subcommand. Also, unless you are searching only for TC, make that f 'STC' -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
In bay169-w48af89a0b757bae9eec2dea3...@phx.gbl, on 07/30/2014 at 06:40 PM, J R jayare...@hotmail.com said: Read all about EDIT here: http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/epubs/pdf/ikj2l200.pdf That's missing an explanation of the current line pointer, although the explanation of FIND has enough information to tell the OP what he did wrong. RCF submitted. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
In 76a0e.704d9458.410ad...@aol.com, on 07/30/2014 at 06:57 PM, Ed Finnell 000248cce9f3-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu said: Some still use IEBUPTDT for change control. I doubt that, although some may still use IEBUPDTE or even IEBUPDAT. Me, I prefer IEBUPDTX. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
In 6487334105557425.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu, on 07/30/2014 at 06:40 PM, Paul Gilmartin 000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu said: That is one of the dumbest, most hostile behaviors I have ever seen in an editor (but TSO edit isn't unique here). If I do a find and get no hits (very possibly because I mistyped the search target) a well-behaved editor should leave the file position unchanged. I disagree, although having an option would be more user friendly, as would optional first and last operands on FIND. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
On Thu, 31 Jul 2014 18:56:09 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: on 07/30/2014 at 06:40 PM, Paul Gilmartin said: That is one of the dumbest, most hostile behaviors I have ever seen in an editor (but TSO edit isn't unique here). If I do a find and get no hits (very possibly because I mistyped the search target) a well-behaved editor should leave the file position unchanged. I disagree, although having an option would be more user friendly, as would optional first and last operands on FIND. As would NEXT and PREV. What does repeat FIND do once you're at the end of the file? If it repeats the search from the opposite end in the same direction, I can see some use for the behavior. Still, I prefer ISPF's convention of issuing an error message on the first unsuccessful FIND, and wrapping on the next -- friendlier in the case of typos in the search target. I regularly use ISPF in batch -- no terminal necessary. So can one use ISPF Edit in line mode? -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
On Jul 31, 2014, at 3:55 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote: On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 23:50:12 -0500, Ed Gould wrote: On Jul 30, 2014, at 6:40 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote: On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 18:57:04 -0400, Ed Finnell wrote: Yep, line mode. If you do a find and get no hits you're at the bottom. That is one of the dumbest, most hostile behaviors I have ever seen in an editor (but TSO edit isn't unique here). If I do a find and get no hits (very possibly because I mistyped the search target) a well- behaved editor should leave the file position unchanged. I disagree and I did live with it for several years and learned to like it. When we got FSE it was like heaven. OK. Please explain why it's useful, or beneficial. Does it save time, or keystrokes, or ???. Would you prefer it if ISPF Edit had that behavior? (One thing I like about ISPF Edit (almost unique) it that you must issue the Repeat Find command twice to wrap the bottom or top of the file. I wrote an XEDIT macro to simulate that behavior.) -- gil Gil: AT the time it was the only thing available. And it was better than panvalet. Ed -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
On Thu, 31 Jul 2014 10:11:14 -0500, Ed Gould wrote: Yep, line mode. If you do a find and get no hits you're at the bottom. That is one of the dumbest, most hostile behaviors I have ever seen in an editor (but TSO edit isn't unique here). If I do a find and get no hits (very possibly because I mistyped the search target) a well- behaved editor should leave the file position unchanged. I disagree and I did live with it for several years and learned to like it. When we got FSE it was like heaven. OK. Please explain why it's useful, or beneficial. Does it save time, or keystrokes, or ???. Would you prefer it if ISPF Edit had that behavior? AT the time it was the only thing available. And it was better than panvalet. But, specifically, why do you like the behavior of moving to the end of the file on an unsuccessful search? -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
On Jul 31, 2014, at 11:30 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote: ---SNIP But, specifically, why do you like the behavior of moving to the end of the file on an unsuccessful search? Gil: Its been thirty years so my memory is iffy here. I always worked with Verify on. My iffy memory says if I got the message not found I would automatically issue a l 0 command (I don't remember TOP as existing.) and reissue the find as I probably mis-keyed it it was automatic not so much as I love it more of rats I didn't do something right. Ed -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
another question about TSO edit command
I am O.K. editing data with line numbers. But when I get data with no line numbers, my commands are not working. i.e. change find etc. Example: ,EDIT, list ,//MSTJCL01 JOB MSGLEVEL=(1,1),TIME=1440, ,// EXEC PGM=IEEMB860,DPRTY=(15,15), ,//STCINRDR DD SYSOUT=(A,INTRDR), ,//TSOINRDR DD SYSOUT=(A,INTRDR), ,//IEFPDSI DD DSN=SYS1.PROCLIB,DISP=SHR, ,// DD DSN=CPAC.PROCLIB,DISP=SHR, ,// DD DSN=SYS1.IBM.PROCLIB,DISP=SHR, ,//IEFJOBS DD DSN=SYS1.JCLLIB,DISP=SHR, ,IKJ52500I END OF DATA, ,EDIT, f STC == ,IKJ52506I TEXT NOT FOUND, ,EDIT, Any help would be appreciated. Thanks -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
You're off the bottom; the current line pointer is at the next-to-be-added line. You need to go back up. Use a L 0 or TOP subcommand. Read all about EDIT here: http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/epubs/pdf/ikj2l200.pdf === Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 21:44:39 + From: jcnorga...@ucdavis.edu Subject: another question about TSO edit command To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU I am O.K. editing data with line numbers. But when I get data with no line numbers, my commands are not working. i.e. change find etc. Example: ,EDIT, list ,//MSTJCL01 JOB MSGLEVEL=(1,1),TIME=1440, ,// EXEC PGM=IEEMB860,DPRTY=(15,15), ,//STCINRDR DD SYSOUT=(A,INTRDR), ,//TSOINRDR DD SYSOUT=(A,INTRDR), ,//IEFPDSI DD DSN=SYS1.PROCLIB,DISP=SHR, ,// DD DSN=CPAC.PROCLIB,DISP=SHR, ,// DD DSN=SYS1.IBM.PROCLIB,DISP=SHR, ,//IEFJOBS DD DSN=SYS1.JCLLIB,DISP=SHR, ,IKJ52500I END OF DATA, ,EDIT, f STC == ,IKJ52506I TEXT NOT FOUND, ,EDIT, Any help would be appreciated. Thanks -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
After entering l 0, got l 0 ,IKJ52502I DATA SET NOT LINE NUMBERED, Which makes sense since the data is not line numbered. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of J R Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 3:41 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: another question about TSO edit command You're off the bottom; the current line pointer is at the next-to-be-added line. You need to go back up. Use a L 0 or TOP subcommand. Read all about EDIT here: http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/epubs/pdf/ikj2l200.pdf === Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 21:44:39 + From: jcnorga...@ucdavis.edu Subject: another question about TSO edit command To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU I am O.K. editing data with line numbers. But when I get data with no line numbers, my commands are not working. i.e. change find etc. Example: ,EDIT, list ,//MSTJCL01 JOB MSGLEVEL=(1,1),TIME=1440, ,// EXEC PGM=IEEMB860,DPRTY=(15,15), ,//STCINRDR DD SYSOUT=(A,INTRDR), ,//TSOINRDR DD SYSOUT=(A,INTRDR), ,//IEFPDSI DD DSN=SYS1.PROCLIB,DISP=SHR, ,// DD DSN=CPAC.PROCLIB,DISP=SHR, ,// DD DSN=SYS1.IBM.PROCLIB,DISP=SHR, ,//IEFJOBS DD DSN=SYS1.JCLLIB,DISP=SHR, ,IKJ52500I END OF DATA, ,EDIT, f STC == ,IKJ52506I TEXT NOT FOUND, ,EDIT, Any help would be appreciated. Thanks -- 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: another question about TSO edit command
Yep, line mode. If you do a find and get no hits you're at the bottom. l * will show where you are. For change, Verify on is good to have. NUM, RENUM, UNNUM should be used with caution on SMP/E controlled members. Some still use IEBUPTDT for change control. In a message dated 7/30/2014 5:41:06 P.M. Central Daylight Time, jayare...@hotmail.com writes: Use a L 0 or TOP subcommand. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 18:57:04 -0400, Ed Finnell wrote: Yep, line mode. If you do a find and get no hits you're at the bottom. That is one of the dumbest, most hostile behaviors I have ever seen in an editor (but TSO edit isn't unique here). If I do a find and get no hits (very possibly because I mistyped the search target) a well-behaved editor should leave the file position unchanged. (Poll: How many of you XEDIT users SET STAY OFF? Why?) l * will show where you are. For change, Verify on is good to have. NUM, RENUM, UNNUM should be used with caution on SMP/E controlled members. Some still use IEBUPTDT for change control. In a message dated 7/30/2014 5:41:06 P.M. Central Daylight Time, jayarelim writes: Use a L 0 or TOP subcommand. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: another question about TSO edit command
On Jul 30, 2014, at 6:40 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote: On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 18:57:04 -0400, Ed Finnell wrote: Yep, line mode. If you do a find and get no hits you're at the bottom. That is one of the dumbest, most hostile behaviors I have ever seen in an editor (but TSO edit isn't unique here). If I do a find and get no hits (very possibly because I mistyped the search target) a well- behaved editor should leave the file position unchanged. Paul: I disagree and I did live with it for several years and learned to like it. When we got FSE it was like heaven. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
