CMS/TSO Pipes!!! On Sat, 14 Nov 2020, 8:26 pm Mike Schwab, <[email protected]> wrote:
> You have to remember that S/360 was the first 8 bit computer. Prior > computers used 4 bits for a digit and 6 bits for a character. They > designed EBCDIC to be easily converted for use with existing 7 track > tape drives, printers, card and tape readers and punches. There was a > proposed ASCII code that was put on documentation but dropped for the > 370 virtual memory bit in the PSW. > > On Sat, Nov 14, 2020 at 6:39 PM Seymour J Metz <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I doubt that IBM custumers would have been happy with an 8-bit code page > with only 128 valid code points. International considerations would still > have forced IBM to device incompatible code pages for different countries. > > > > Obviously 8859 is another Tower of Babel; why do you think I described > it as "a dollar short"? > > > > No,, IBM could not have implemented full Unicode, or even the full MLP, > back in the 1960s. But it could certainly have implemented a basic subset > for all customers and selected additional pages for international > customers. Had Unicode and UTF-8 been around at the time, I'm certain that > IBM would have gone that route. > > > > > > -- > > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on > behalf of Paul Gilmartin <[email protected]> > > Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2020 6:22 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: Improve OMVS cp performance? > > > > On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 23:00:00 +0000, Seymour J Metz wrote: > > > > >Because there was no standard 8-bit code at the time. IBM did push for > an 8-bit ASCII, > > > > > That's not an obstacle. DEC PDP-8 stored ASCII characters one per > > 12-bit word. IBM could have simply declared the top bit "reserved" > > as they are so often wont to do. > > > > >but it never happened except for a mapping between octets and punch > combinations on cards. Had Unicode been around at the time they would > probably have jumped at it. > > > > > >ISO 8859 was a day late and a dollar short. > > > > > ISO-8859-* is afflicted with the same babel as EBCDIC code pages > > because of the "*" you elided. > > > > UTF-8 is the norm nowadays because of a peculiar upward compatibility > > with ASCII. But the mebibytes and megahertz to support it came a day > late. > > > > -- gil > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > -- > Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA > Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
