On Sat, 3 Feb 2024 21:47:56 -0600, Mark Zelden wrote: > >Agree to disagree. I haven't checked the doc and maybe it isn't documented >that that field or >any field is limited to 40 characters, but it is not a bug to be fixed. It >could be enhanced >in the service stream, but it is most definitely not a defect. Someone else >already >stated that D OMVS,A=ALL (or something similar) didn't show the entire command. >Restriction on the display output... not a defect. > I shall disagree. For example, suppose there were an option to display a data set name in that 4-character field. Some names, probably a minority, would be truncated. But if the user enlarged that field, names were still truncated to 40 characters then padded with blanks, I could consider that only a defect, not a candidate for RFE.
An earlier ply pointed a finger at an underlying service. If so, the SR should be transferred to that service. There are multiple ways it could have been done right: o The caller could provide a variable-length reply buffer. o The service could return a pointer to a string. Error handling is left as an exercise for the student. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
