HP3000-L Archives

February 1999, Week 1

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
RON HORNER <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
RON HORNER <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 2 Feb 1999 09:01:08 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (37 lines)
I think that one example of why programmers can't always fix the record
layout is in custom job submission programs.  Depending on how the jcl
file is created, sometimes the record size is 80 bytes.  In other times
the record size in a jcl file is 72.

As much as we would like to say, "BUILD YOU FILE IT MATCH THIS RECORD
LAYOUT".  It doesn't always happen that way.

Later.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Walter Murray [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Monday, February 01, 1999 1:52 PM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      Re: Cobol Experts!
>
> Joe Howell ([log in to unmask]) wrote:
> : My brain must not be working well this morning.  I am working on a
> Y2K
> : remediation effort for a client, and we would need to get around the
> : infamous error quoted below.  Yes, I know that older versions of CM
> Cobol
> : did not enforce file sizes in FD's and now NM COBOL 85 does.  My
> question
> : is, isn't there a way (COBRUNTIME?) to tell Cobol to ignore this
> offending
> : condition?  (for the time being, anyway) I looked up the COBRUNTIME
> : settings on LaserRom and they didn't seem to address this problem.
>
> Just curious.  Rather than compile with the ANSI74 entry point or
> the STAT74 control option, to get around the error, why not correct
> the error by fixing the program to correctly describe the file?
>
> Walter Murray
> Hewlett-Packard
> Support Technology Lab

ATOM RSS1 RSS2