On Wednesday, October 2, 2019, 12:52:56 PM PDT, Kirk Wolf wrote: > You really like all of this mangling of the shell syntax?
In all Unix systems, we simply avoid situations where this mangling is needed (e.g. "sh -c some-mangled-statements"). Why do you think this a good practice in BPXBATCH when it's considered a bad practice in Unix? The commonly accepted solution is to create a proper script file and call it. By the way, "#" comments must be terminated by a newline. The ";" command terminator character is considered to be part of the comment which is why you cannot terminate comments properly. > For heaven's sake, why doesn't it just read the input from DD:STDIN IBM simply followed the Unix standard practice. They start the shell and pass STDPARM data as an argument. Probably "sh -c data-from-stdparm-as-a-string". I suspect that newline is not supported because it's should be interpreted as end of the "sh" command. For IBM to do as you suggest, the DD:STDIN would be copied to FD0 ( Unix stdin ) which introduces several much larger problems and would cause confusion for the user. Scripts should always be in a script file otherwise the behavior changes and will cause confusion. If you truly need the newline feature from inline JCL data, then have STDPARM copy your script DD (including newlines) and execute this copied script.. Alternatively, you could have an edit macro that submits a BPXBATCH job calling the script file you are currently editing. Jon. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
