Bernd, I think (but I'm not sure) that you and I are talking about the same goals :-) Does the "second way" you envision have a static (execution) definition that does not allow human interaction ? If so we are on the same page, if not then we are talking about different things.
I believe the most significant complaint about JCL is it's syntax and perhaps it's "look and feel" which are so different than other "scripting" languages. There are other limitations that I personally would like to see removed but I am really trying to understand what others would like to see in the "new JCL" (really need a snappy name for it :-). I am not particularly focused on the question of allowing other "scripting" languages beyond REXX to be used, but on the other hand I do not see any significant reason why it couldn't be done in theory. In practice, I suspect that the stumbling blocks will be a combination of technical and non-technical so for the time being I want to see how far REXX can take us. John McDowell >Hello John, > >I would like to clarify my viewpoint: > >first, I believe that traditional JCL must stay and needs to be improved >in the way that the other posters suggested. > >What I would like to see is a second way of doing batch on z/OS, where >we have a sort of command line interface, like TSO ALLOC, FREE and >ISPF SELECT PGM, for example, but without the burden of starting >TSO, REXX and ISPF first - and with the power of REXX to manipulate >the batch commands. > >We need some sort of clever replacements for > >- DD statements >- EXEC statements >- STEPLIB concatenations > >which can be used from this new command line interface (in batch !) >without much limitation compared to the existing JCL interface, if >possible, >but with the possibility to add REXX as a control language (or other >scripting languages, BTW). > >I don't want this to replace traditional JCL, but to add a second line of >batch processing. Maybe some shops do more and more work with this >technique, >maybe others stay with (old) JCL. > >Restart problems have to be solved; if the new batches contain loops >etc, the >restart information has to contain information about the status of the >controlling >REXX. There is no general solution to that, and there will be batches >that are >not restartable (same situation as today, I believe). > >Could we maybe make the mainframe platform more attractive this way to >younger people? I could imagine that JCL is one of the reasons why they >don't like the mainframe now. At least that's what I often hear when doing >classes with 20 year old students on PL/1 and similar topics ... they like >the language, but they dislike the environment and especially JCL ... > >BTW: I don't really think that this will happen, but if we're talking about >dreams, that's what I'd really like to see. There are some efforts to make >the platform attractive (RDZ etc.), but that's too expensive IMO, and it >leaves the platform unchanged and only hides the old things from the >novice users, instead of really improving the platform itself. > >Kind regards > >Bernd ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
