Just out of curiosity, looking at "MVS JCL" for MVS/SP from Dec. 1984 on archive.org. It is a combined Guide and Reference, FWIW.
Says Length: The entire information passed must not exceed 100 characters. Charles -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Charles Mills Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 6:50 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Question about PARMDD 100 forever. No harm in maxing at 144. Charles -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Clark Morris Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 6:20 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Question about PARMDD [Default] On 27 Feb 2017 07:44:46 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main bill.wood...@gmail.com (Bill Woodger) wrote: >On Monday, 27 February 2017 15:00:03 UTC+1, Allan Staller wrote: >> No. IBM chose not to break thousands upon thousands of programs that >> were perfectly happy with 100 byte parm fields, provided via JCL. >> They added a new mechanism for those program, where 100 bytes was not sufficient. >> > >Unless you change the JCL to use PARMDD on the EXEC instead of PARM on >the EXEC, nothing changes. > >If you make that change for no purpose, and then the program is doing something which relies on there being 100 bytes of data as a maximum implicitly, then you may have a problem. But how is that IBM's fault? No-one forced the JCL change. When did it change to 100? I always tested for 144 as a maximum or whatever I was expecting going back to MVT. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
