Peter, We are almost exclusively an assembler shop, but recently we have added a few C routines that use LE.
It blows me away that LE has to take a perfectly good 0C1, 0C4 or 0C7 and convert it into a U4xxx code. Not only that, they have to obfuscate the registers. Is there a conversion table for LE user codes to regular abend codes? (OK, 0Cx's aren't an abend in that no ABEND macro was issued, but for 50 years we have been calling them ABENDS0C4 and the like.) Chris Blaicher Principal Software Engineer, Software Development Syncsort Incorporated 50 Tice Boulevard, Woodcliff Lake, NJ 07677 P: 201-930-8260 | M: 512-627-3803 E: [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Peter Relson Sent: Monday, November 03, 2014 8:58 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Abend s0077 >But I AM the frequently the first person to look it up in the manual. I understand that in your shop you are the first to look at the book. But that is not the same as being the first to see the abend. Even on IBM-Main there are many cases of ragging on people to RT(F)M (at least to take a stab at finding what to read). If any of your customers are writing and running their own programs, that should be expected. If they are just running canned jobs that "should" never abend (or if they do, then it's not the customer's fault) then passing it along to the sysprog makes perfect sense. The books have no way of knowing whether they are being read by someone who wrote the program that blew up or someone who just ran someone else's program which blew up, so the books take a rational approach at segregating the information according to the potential audiences. >hiding an S0C7 as a U4xxx error is not helpful. Are you suggesting something like when LE recovery fields a system-produced completion code (S0C7 is not an "abend") that it leave that code alone and not change it to a user completion code? That could be provided as some sort of a configuration option. It cannot be done unconditionally as it is compatible and could break existing programs. It might not even be possible if you are using LE (E)SPIE since there is no 0C7 in such a case, there is just a program interrupt 7 presented to the ESPIE routine (but as of a few releases ago, LE could for such a case tell the system to continue on to RTM for this program interrupt where it would become S0C7). If "leave it alone" is something that you want, then I suggest that you go through a more formal approach to request it than an IBM-Main conversation. Peter Relson z/OS Core Technology Design ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ________________________________ ATTENTION: ----- The information contained in this message (including any files transmitted with this message) may contain proprietary, trade secret or other confidential and/or legally privileged information. Any pricing information contained in this message or in any files transmitted with this message is always confidential and cannot be shared with any third parties without prior written approval from Syncsort. This message is intended to be read only by the individual or entity to whom it is addressed or by their designee. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are on notice that any use, disclosure, copying or distribution of this message, in any form, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and/or Syncsort and destroy all copies of this message in your possession, custody or control. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
