On Sun, 6 May 2012 23:23:14 -0400, Robert A. Rosenberg wrote: > >The problem is that before 64 AMODE you had 3 AMODE Choices - >24-Only, 31-Only, or BOTH 24 and 31 (ie: Any). If I code AMODE-31 I >can have problems with something that needs AMODE-24. There needs to >be am AMODE (such as ALL) to say that all 3 AMODES (24/31/64) are >supported. > Errr... But when AMODE 128 happens, will ALL automatically include that, or will it once again have a counterintuitive meaning? Rather customers should be encouraged to use AMODE(24,31,64), but to use AMODE(ALL) only if they are prepared to accommodate any future extensions to addressing modes.
AMODE(128) is perhaps unrealistic (nowadays, but 120-bit addressing is in the architecture of ZFS (I don't mean zFS)). But in the context of the original topic, the possibility of a new DFSMS message destination is realistic and should be taken into account. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
