Code Comments

Programming Forum and web based access to our favorite programming groups.
For Programmers: Free Programming Magazines | New: Database administration forum
Registration is free! Edit your profileCalendarFind other membersFrequently Asked QuestionsSearch -> 
Post New Thread











Thread
Author

Re: EBCDIC to ASCII OPTCD=Q? (JCL)
Clark F Morris wrote:

messages snipped

> I have noticed the same syndrome.  Somehow those in charge don't
> realize that JCL (OCL/shell script/command language of choice or
> affliction), utility control statements and similar artifacts are code
> that may be making business decisions.  In the case of sort control
> statements like INCLUDE/OMIT, the decisions can be made in a really
> obscure way.  If companies really cared about documentation and
> auditablity, they would have only COBOL/PL1/other language sorts and
> not an easily changed and obscure bunch of control statements running
> the sorts.
>

Surely the most appropriate action is to apply testing, audit and
documentation standards to JCL, utilities, etc in the same way as
programs.  One could perhaps have an approved list, so that the
organisation's personnel can be reasonably expected to be familiar with
them and have access to the relevant manuals for debugging, etc.
Writing several hundred lines in place of just a few seems like
overkill.

Robert


Report this thread to moderator Post Follow-up to this message
Old Post
Robert Jones
09-20-06 11:55 PM


Re: EBCDIC to ASCII OPTCD=Q? (JCL)
On 20 Sep 2006 12:06:41 -0700, "Robert Jones" <rjones0@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>
>Clark F Morris wrote:
>
>messages snipped
> 
>
>Surely the most appropriate action is to apply testing, audit and
>documentation standards to JCL, utilities, etc in the same way as
>programs.  One could perhaps have an approved list, so that the
>organisation's personnel can be reasonably expected to be familiar with
>them and have access to the relevant manuals for debugging, etc.
>Writing several hundred lines in place of just a few seems like
>overkill.

I agree that the suggested course should be undertaken.  However, most
mainframe sorts that I have seen use the field displacement, length
and type in specifications rather than field names.  I understand that
ICETOOL from IBM and Visual Syncsort improve on this.  Syncsort for
HP-UX also can use copy books and will allow you to write something
that can be read and understood 6 months later.  However a COBOL
program can be fairly minimal in actual coding through the use of
copybooks and can in many cases allow consolidations.  We are not in a
world of 64K partitions or 512K regions anymore.
>
>Robert

Report this thread to moderator Post Follow-up to this message
Old Post
Clark F Morris
09-20-06 11:55 PM


Sponsored Links




Last Thread Next Thread Next
Search this forum -> 
Post New Thread

Cobol archive

Show a Printable Version Send to friend Email This Page to Someone! subscribe to this thread Receive updates to this thread
Computer Consultants
Programming Jobs
Visual Basic Controls
SQL Server Programming
Webservices
Java Security
Visual Studio
C# Programming
Visual J++
Software engineering
Open source Software
Perl Programming
PHP Programming
ASP Programming
ASP .NET Programming
Visual Basic Programming
Windows Scripting Host
Java Programming
Java Help
Java Beans
VBScript
Cobol
MAC Applications
Unix Programming
Forum Jump:
All times are GMT. The time now is 01:02 PM.

 
Free MCSE Braindumps | Real Estate Topics

Programming forum archive

Copyrights CodeComments.com 2004 - 2006

Powered by vBulletin Copyright 2000-2006 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.