That sounds like a job for ChaatGPT <g>
________________________________________
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> on behalf of
John McKown <john.archie.mck...@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 4, 2023 1:22 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: 0C1 abend
On Tue, Jul 4, 2023, 12:13 zMan <zedgarhoo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Indeed. It's hard to see how doing so would break anything, since it's
> already broken by definition, more or less. One can (barely) imagine
> someone setting a trap to recover from such a thing, but c'mon...
>
> Oh, wait, you don't consider an 0C1 to be documented? /s
>
{grin} S0C1 is documented. Basically means "you goofed up". I would like
some Snnn-hh which specifically means "attempted I/O on a DCB (or ACB) upon
which an OPEN was attempted, but failed." It might even be nice to have the
address initialized to an abend which specifically states "I/O attempted on
a DCB/ACB which was was never the object of an OPEN."
Tue, Jul 4, 2023 at 12:23 PM John McKown <john.archie.mck...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I really wish that IBM had put the address of a routine in the DCB or ACB
> > so that a documented ABEND would occur.
> >
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
