Comentários (4)

1 MartinTr comentou às Link permanente

Martin, <br /> I do believe it is better to use PUNCH for this as well. Postprocessing of the file is required and doing that with a SYSPCH- (or SYSPUNCH) is common. AND (now comes the commercial for the other op-sys) in VSE it is almost impossible to postprocess a print-file. <div>&nbsp;</div> Martin T

2 MartinPacker comentou às Link permanente

Hi Martin... <div>&nbsp;</div> This is a difficult one: Personally I'd prefer not to be mucking with object decks but rather something relatively benign like listings. But if you HAVE to mangle object decks almost the same technique would apply. Ray mentioned a Type 2 record for PUNCH. I might be giving it the wrong name here. So looking for those and ripping them out would be feasible. <div>&nbsp;</div> Colour me easily scared. :-) Maybe object decks aren't so fearsome after all. <div>&nbsp;</div> And you mentioned the other operating system. How about the other other one - VM? :-)

3 ijmitch comentou às Link permanente

Hi Martin, <br /> Just to add an alternative view here, in CICS we recently reworked the way to manage our message texts. Previously we'd used a bespoke file format with our own tools that spat out both the GML for the Messages and Codes book and assembler source which we assembled for the runtime. <div>&nbsp;</div> Now we have an XML file and some XSLTs which do the same thing - we've got XSLTs which take the XML and spit out assembler. So we've chosen XML as the primary source format rather than hlasm source. <div>&nbsp;</div> Ian J Mitchell

4 MartinPacker comentou às Link permanente

Ian, that's an interesting approach: Keep a higher order data than the assembler format - and do with it what that willst. :-) <div>&nbsp;</div> In my case it's probably not worth the bustage. :-(