Gerhard > ... the DISP is used to reflect the state of an entire data set and not individual members.
That's *not* what the section you quoted before says to me! Try making sense of the following otherwise: <quote> When you specify DISP=MOD or DISP=NEW for a partitioned data set (PDS) or partitioned data set extended (PDSE), and you also specify a member name in the DSNAME parameter, the member name must not already exist. If the member name already exists, the system terminates the job. </quote> I tried to work out what the section you quoted meant using the concept that a "data set" specified as just data_set_name and a "data set" specified as data_set_name(member_name) were *not* the same but that the "data set" was just to what the data_set_name referred. This finally didn't work - mainly because I had to assume an error in the paragraph above. Once I had accepted that "data set" meant data_set_name or data_set_name (member_name), what I found in the manual made sense. Applying Occam's razor, I accepted the latter interpretation. Of course, I could just be having an incredibly dense Saturday and I should desist from making any technical posts this weekend! Chris Mason On Fri, 4 Mar 2011 19:46:01 -0800, Gerhard Adam <[email protected]> wrote: >I don't think it's a question of what to reply, but rather if you feel the >product is poorly documented or supported, then it seems the place to be >having this conversation is with IBM. I personally can't see any reason for >coding DISP=MOD or DISP=NEW when maintaining PDS members. As for, customers >can do what they want ... perhaps so, but not if they expect support. I had >one programmer code DISP=(OLD,DELETE) to try and remove a member from a >LNKLST library, so I don't accept that argument (fortunately security >prevented him from deleting the entire library). If they use the DISP >improperly, then you will see this kind of coding. > >My point about poor coding practice, is that the DISP is used to reflect the >state of an entire data set and not individual members. So while DISP=NEW >and DISP=MOD are supported, there's no practical reason for their use and it >creates the erroneous view that DISP processing operates against members. > >While it's not my place to tell you what to do, or how your organization >runs, I'm concerned that you've mentioned that you have a "bug", but haven't >mentioned what IBM's response is to this (perhaps you mentioned it already >and I simply missed it)? > >I don't find that the MVS documentation is "scattered" as much as it is >redundant in numerous placed. I don't recall seeing conflicting or >contradictory documentation, so I'm not quite sure what you mean by that >statement. From what I posted, it was found exactly where it should be, so >I'm not sure what you might be referring to. > >If you don't mind ... what is the "bug" you're experiencing? Is it behaving >in some unusual way or simply failing? > >Adam ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
