I've always been in favor of opening up IPCS to non-sysprog types. With some caveats. A long time ago IPCS actually required access to SYS1.PARMLIB, which in my shop at the time was an audit no-no. No longer a problem. The biggest inhibitor today is probably how useful IPCS would be for high-level-language programmers. Not necessarily a lot of COBOL insights to be found there. If the alternative is wading through SYSUDUMP, then IPCS is a far better choice. But there are debugging tools out there more simpatico toward modern programming languages.
The one reservation I might (still) have is that an IPCS user can look up anyone's skirt or down anyone's shorts. What's to see? Back to audit. ;-( . . . J.O.Skip Robinson Southern California Edison Company Electric Dragon Team Paddler SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager 323-715-0595 Mobile 626-302-7535 Office [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Lizette Koehler Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 1:05 PM To: [email protected] Subject: (External):Re: IPCS The only risk I have found in the past is - Understanding how IPCS works What it is in IPCS that they need? Otherwise, I have allowed programmers to use it. Saved me from extracting data from dumps for them. Lizette > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of Lopez, Sharon > Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 1:47 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: IPCS > > Do others use IPCS instead of systems programmers? I always thought > of it as a system's programmers tool but now we have application > developers that want access to it. What are the risks of giving access to > developers? > > Thanks in advance. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
