On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 14:54:49 -0500, John Eells wrote:
>Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>
>>>
>> You're suggesting that a transcript or summary of those discussions
>> is available. Can you cite? Thanks.
>>
>
>
>I suggested neither one, so I am a bit puzzled about how you inferred
>that. What I wrote was,
--Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Tom Marchant
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2017 4:34 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Question about PARMDD
On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 22:20:07 -0400, Clark Morris wrote:
>When did it
Tom Marchant wrote:
>Some time between 1967 and 1970.
I think the limits of 40 or 100 characters were based on a quick way (without
using tapes or extra punch cards) to give shortish parameters to a program
using puch cards. Or so it was told to me by an oldie years ago.
About "Reference of t
On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 22:20:07 -0400, Clark Morris wrote:
>When did it change to 100?
Some time between 1967 and 1970.
See page 85 of
http://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/pdf/ibm/360/os/R19_Jun70/GC28-6704-0_JCL_Reference_Rel_19_Jun70.pdf
for OS/360, dated June, 1970
PARM=value
value
consists of
o: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.
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
[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 fiel
Paul Gilmartin wrote:
You're suggesting that a transcript or summary of those discussions
is available. Can you cite? Thanks.
I suggested neither one, so I am a bit puzzled about how you inferred
that. What I wrote was, "In fact, there was a protracted discussion
right here in IBM-MAI
Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Charles Mills
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 10:10 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Question about PARMDD
Well that was my recollection but looking at
https://www.ibm.com/support
Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 9:42 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Question about PARMDD
On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 09:18:04 -0800, Charles Mills wrote:
>Admittedly p
On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 06:47:14 -0500, John Eells wrote:
>Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>
>> http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/475/756/7ab.jpg
>>
>> ... what the users wanted was a PARM on the EXEC statement longer than 100
>> bytes.
>> Somehow, IBM couldn't understand.
>
>
>We certainly
On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 16:27:51 +, Windt, W.K.F. van der (Fred) wrote:
>But how would support for a longer parameter possibly break an existing
>program? The program is passed the address of a binary half word (the length
>of the content of the parm) followed by that content. Even if a much lon
On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 09:18:04 -0800, Charles Mills wrote:
>Admittedly poor technique, but a program allocates a 100-byte buffer. It
>moves the parm info into that buffer using an executed MVC or an MVCL
>without first verifying that the length is no more than 100. Conceivably a
>security exposure:
EDU
Subject: Re: Question about PARMDD
But how would support for a longer parameter possibly break an existing
program? The program is passed the address of a binary half word (the length
of the content of the parm) followed by that content. Even if a much longer
parm was supported nothing would chang
Sorry, Allan, one of those occasions when reading all of the words prior to
jumping is good...
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-M
I disagree.
>
> I am in support of the path IBM chose.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Bill Woodger
> Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 9:46 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subj
rom: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Bill Woodger
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 9:46 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Question about PARMDD
On Monday, 27 February 2017 15:00:03 UTC+1, Allan Staller wrote:
> No. IBM chose not to break thou
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.
>
Un
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.
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 11:16:33 -0600, Juergen Kehr wrote:
>
>since a while we're
Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 11:16:33 -0600, Juergen Kehr wrote:
since a while we're using the new PARMDD keyword for our DB2 subsystems.
http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/475/756/7ab.jpg
... what the users wanted was a PARM on the EXEC statement longer than
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 11:16:33 -0600, Juergen Kehr wrote:
>
>since a while we're using the new PARMDD keyword for our DB2 subsystems.
>
http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/475/756/7ab.jpg
... what the users wanted was a PARM on the EXEC statement longer than 100
bytes.
Somehow, IBM
The exact possibilities for the content of a PARM in a JCL deck depend on an
interaction between "JCL" and the data the parm represents, (as David W Noon
was keen to impress in the other thread on this).
What happens for PARM-in-JCL need not happen for PARM-in-PARMDD. PARMDD did not
exist previ
On Thu, 23 Feb 2017 22:12:00 -0400, Clark Morris wrote:
>
Just read carefully. JCL Ref.; EXEC Statement; PARMDD paramter says ...
>The knowledge center says the processing strips out blanks and
>sequence numbers. I am not certain as to where a sequence number
>would be in format V or VB data set
[Default] On 23 Feb 2017 12:59:08 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
bill.wood...@gmail.com (Bill Woodger) wrote:
>I don't think so either. There is documentation of the possibility of symbol
>substitution, but nothing about placement of commas, nothing about
>continuation symbols, and a piece abou
I don't think so either. There is documentation of the possibility of symbol
substitution, but nothing about placement of commas, nothing about continuation
symbols, and a piece about embedded blanks being possible. Particularly this
latter could be affected by the embedding of comments in such
On Thu, 23 Feb 2017 16:23:24 -0400, Clark Morris wrote:
>
>>It will work more or less as you expect, with no C's necessary. The
>>following is cut-and-pasted *exactly* from a working job, and the parm works
>>as expected.
>>
>>/CZAAPILD EXEC PGM=CZAAPILD,
>>// PARM=('INST(CAM.Test.Agent)',
>>//*
IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
>Behalf Of Clark Morris
>Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 6:34 AM
>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>Subject: Re: Question about PARMDD
>
>[Default] On 22 Feb 2017 14:28:53 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
>000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.
ainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Clark Morris
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 6:34 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Question about PARMDD
[Default] On 22 Feb 2017 14:28:53 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu (
[Default] On 22 Feb 2017 14:28:53 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu (Paul Gilmartin) wrote:
Could someone try the following to see if it works? Assume the C for
continuation is in column 72.
//STER1 EXEC PGM=IEFBR14,PARM=(PARAM1, some comment
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 22:10:43 +, David W Noon wrote:
>
>> This thread began with a discussion of the PARM string. I'd like to think
>> of JCL
>> as source code, not as data.
>
>You can consider JCL as whatever you wish. The point I was making was
>that the PARM string is data, not source code.
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:05:54 -0600, Paul Gilmartin
(000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu) wrote about "Re:
Question about PARMDD" (in
<5643810626893433.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu>):
[snip]
> This thread began with a discussion of the PARM string. I'd
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 20:18:25 +, David W Noon wrote:
> ...
>Indeed, you have two character strings with a comment separating them,
>then implicitly concatenated. Neither string contains a comment.
>
>More than that, you are processing source code here, not data. The REXX
>language defines commen
ubject: Re: Question about PARMDD
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 19:52:26 +, David W Noon wrote:
>
>You need to remember that the PARMDD file is read in and concatenated
>into a character string. The notion of comments inside a character
>string is rather a strange one to me, as a progra
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 14:00:55 -0600, Paul Gilmartin
(000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu) wrote about "Re:
Question about PARMDD" (in
<1294479713669226.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu>):
> On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 19:52:26 +, David W Noon wrote:
>>
>>
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 19:52:26 +, David W Noon wrote:
>
>You need to remember that the PARMDD file is read in and concatenated
>into a character string. The notion of comments inside a character
>string is rather a strange one to me, as a programmer who has been doing
>string parsing for decades.
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 11:11:58 -0700, Lizette Koehler
(stars...@mindspring.com) wrote about "Re: Question about PARMDD" (in
<11166244.8506.1487787118...@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>):
> There is no one standard for Parmlib members and comments.
>
> You would need t
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 11:11:58 -0700, Lizette Koehler wrote:
>There is no one standard for Parmlib members and comments.
>
If there were, it would violate Conway's Law.
-- gil
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access
SCHEDxx then you might look at SCHEDxx syntax.
If you have not done so, you might want to post on the DB2 List. To join, go
to IDUG.ORG
Lizette
-Original Message-
>From: Juergen Kehr
>Sent: Feb 22, 2017 10:16 AM
>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>Subject: Question about PAR
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 11:16:33 -0600, Juergen Kehr wrote:
>
>My question now is: Is it possible to have any comments in the PARMLIB member
>(here: DB31MSTR)?
>
>The content now is ZPARM(DSNZP310),GROUP(DSNDB3),MEMBER(DB31)
>
You can make it a JCLLIB member to be included as an an instream data s
Hello,
since a while we're using the new PARMDD keyword for our DB2 subsystems.
Here an example:
//DB31MSTR PROC
//IEFPROC EXEC PGM=DSNYASCP,
// PARMDD=ZPARMDD,
// DYNAMNBR=119,
40 matches
Mail list logo
