On Feb 4, 2016, at 3:03 PM, Joel C. Ewing <[email protected]> wrote: > > Job Control Language is indeed an artificial > language, but I wouldn't dignify it by calling it a programming > language.
When I do staff training on JCL, I describe it as a human interface language. Human-computer interfaces depend on input-output technologies. For the past two or three decades, when our main I/O technologies have been graphical monitors, keyboards, and mice, most of our computers have had windowed graphical interfaces supporting “point-and-click” interactions. With the invention of touch sensitive displays for smartphones and tablets, we’re in the middle of a transition to a new style of interfaces based on touching, pinching, swiping, etc. Those of us who’ve been around for a while remember an earlier transition to the “point-and-click” windowed interfaces from command line interfaces like the Unix or DOS or TSO READY prompts, when our main I/O technologies were keyboards and text monitors. JCL comes from an even earlier era when the punch card was the primary input technology. When you think of an EXEC statement as the ancient equivalent of double-clicking or touching an application icon, and a DD statement as the equivalent of an open or save dialog, JCL makes more sense and some of it’s limitations seem more reasonable. On the other hand, thinking of it as a programming language (or even a scripting language) creates false expectations that lead to disappointment and frustration. -- Pew, Curtis G [email protected] ITS Systems/Core/Administrative Services ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
