A Friday musing. We at SHARE pounded on IBM for years to implement symbol substitution in batch. IBM's defense of the status quo was that unlike STC and TSO, where execution is immediate on a known system, a batch job could wander all around the JES network on its way from submit to execute. And then languish indefinitely on the end point system before actually executing. Where and how would appropriate substitution take place? In a several open forums over the years, attendees (customers) often disagreed on the 'right' place and method to do it. Just sayin'.
. . . J.O.Skip Robinson Southern California Edison Company Electric Dragon Team Paddler SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager 626-302-7535 Office 323-715-0595 Mobile [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Farley, Peter x23353 Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 1:39 PM To: [email protected] Subject: (External):Re: Premature SYMBOL substitution in SYSIN? It would seem to be a case of (as I think was mentioned in an earlier reply) associating the second SET with the second execution of PROC P and processing the second SET *before* starting the second execution of PROC P. Inserting an extra step to execute IEFBR14 just before the second SET statement also gives correct results in the GENER output: // EXPORT SYMLIST=* //P PROC //GEN EXEC PGM=IEBGENER //SYSPRINT DD SYSOUT=(,) //SYSIN DD DUMMY //SYSUT2 DD SYSOUT=(,) //P PEND //* // SET V2=WOMBAT ************************************* //WOMBAT1 EXEC P //SYSUT1 DD *,SYMBOLS=JCLONLY GENER STEP; WITH V2=&V2.. //WOMBAT2 EXEC P //SYSUT1 DD *,SYMBOLS=JCLONLY GENER STEP; WITH V2=&V2.. //NEWSTEP EXEC PGM=IEFBR14 <==== INSERTED STEP HERE // SET V2=XYZZY ************************************* //XYZZY1 EXEC P //SYSUT1 DD *,SYMBOLS=JCLONLY GENER STEP; WITH V2=&V2.. //XYZZY2 EXEC P //SYSUT1 DD *,SYMBOLS=JCLONLY GENER STEP; WITH V2=&V2.. // HTH Peter -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 4:27 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Premature SYMBOL substitution in SYSIN? On Mon, 9 Nov 2015 10:12:01 -0600, Tom Marchant wrote: > >Mine was corrected with OA47958 > My systems programmer tells me we now have that. In my somewhat different case, the JESJCL shows: ... <Snipped> Still broke. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
