Re: COBOL in TK4-: Handling Signed Numbers
Mark et al, This is probably what I recall. I started on ICL 1900 cobol in about 1970, which only had DISPLAY and COMPUTATIONAL fields. I then moved via ICL 2900 series which had COMP-3, to IBM 370. We did a lot of conversions from ICL to IBM, so for efficiency, we also only used COMP-3 for calculations (of the appropriate length). Chris -- <cjar1950@...> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- On Wed, 06 Jan 2021 14:52:18 -0800 "Mark Waterbury" <mark.s.waterbury@...> wrote: I could be mis-remembering ... the last time I did any COBOL programming professionally was in the 1970s ...
I think the problem with leaving it up to the compiler is that the compiler must do the implicit conversions to (temporary working storage) packed decimal in order to perform arithmetic, and then convert back to zoned decimal to store the results.?? This added a lot of overhead, especially on the early 360 and 370 models.? So, I was always taught to just allocate your own working storage variables with USAGE COMP-3 and move any fields into those variables, before performing any arithmetic operations, and then, when all done with the computations, convert the results back to zoned decimal, if that is what was needed or desired.
If you want to see what the compiler is generating, use the PMAP and DMAP compiler options.
Also, recall that with the S/360, it was real core memory, that was the most expensive component of most mainframe systems, and was a "scarce resource."? And DASD space was also not all that huge or available, and because packed decimal required only half the number of bytes to store numbers compared to zoned decimal, that was also usually the preferred method for long-term storage.? This was even true on magnetic tape.
So, it was normally only for use in punched cards or printouts where you had to convert to zoned decimal.
As far as I can recall ...
|
Re: COBOL in TK4-: Handling Signed Numbers
I could be mis-remembering ... the last time I did any COBOL programming professionally was in the 1970s ...
I think the problem with leaving it up to the compiler is that the compiler must do the implicit conversions to (temporary working storage) packed decimal in order to perform arithmetic, and then convert back to zoned decimal to store the results.?? This added a lot of overhead, especially on the early 360 and 370 models.? So, I was always taught to just allocate your own working storage variables with USAGE COMP-3 and move any fields into those variables, before performing any arithmetic operations, and then, when all done with the computations, convert the results back to zoned decimal, if that is what was needed or desired.
If you want to see what the compiler is generating, use the PMAP and DMAP compiler options.
Also, recall that with the S/360, it was real core memory, that was the most expensive component of most mainframe systems, and was a "scarce resource."? And DASD space was also not all that huge or available, and because packed decimal required only half the number of bytes to store numbers compared to zoned decimal, that was also usually the preferred method for long-term storage.? This was even true on magnetic tape.
So, it was normally only for use in punched cards or printouts where you had to convert to zoned decimal.
As far as I can recall ...
|
Re: COBOL in TK4-: Handling Signed Numbers
I respectfully disagree. You don't have to convert to COMP-3 to perform calculations as the compiler will handle all the necessary conversions behind the scenes.
Your program will be slightly larger and slower though.
Defining your numeric fields as COMP-3 just spares the compiler from adding PACK and UNPACK instructions to your code that will be executed every time you perform a calculation.
John
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto: [email protected]] On Behalf Of cjar1950 via groups.io Sent: Wednesday, January 6, 2021 10:59 PM To: [email protected]Subject: Re: [H390-MVS] COBOL in TK4-: Handling Signed Numbers Joe, I concur. I was trying to delve some 40 years into my memory. I seem to recall that Mark also makes a valid point.. You have to move SCORE to a COMP-3 field in order to do numeric calculations. Chris -- <cjar1950@...> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- On Wed, 6 Jan 2021 15:50:40 -0600 "Joe Monk" <joemonk64@...> wrote: Patrik,
"77 SCORE PIC S9(6)V99
SIGN IS LEADING."
This is not valid for MVT Cobol. Just take off the "sign is leading".
Now let me show you a trick:
02 SCORE-TXT PIC X(10).
02 SCORE-NUM-R REDEFINES SCORE-TXT.
03 FILLER PIC XX.
03 SCORE-NUM PIC S9(6)v99.
WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
77 SCORE PIC ++++,+++.99 VALUE ZERO.
Now do: MOVE SCORE-NUM TO SCORE.
Joe
On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 2:33 PM Patrik Schindler <poc@...> wrote:
Hello,
I have a sequential file with records being fed to it via external
card reader. Works very well. I want to do some statistics with the
data, so I want to use the (very old) COBOL compiler delivered with
TK4-. I struggle with the format for getting the number parsed in
the correct way in pos. 18
- 25.
Format:
* 1 10 20 30 40 50
* +---+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+
* Jan 6 17:03:30 0003.10 4.8 166039
* Jan 6 17:08:05 -0002.20 3.5 9007
(I have changed the preparation script on Linux to always do a
zero-fill, if this might have been the culprit. Not, it isn’t. Issue
stays the same.)
This is my current format description:
01 STATISTICS-INPILE-FORMAT.
02 MONTHNAME PIC A(3).
02 FILLER PIC X.
02 DAY-OF-MONTH PIC 9(2).
02 FILLER PIC X.
02 TIMESPEC.
03 T-HOUR PIC 9(2).
03 FILLER PIC X.
03 T-MINUTE PIC 9(2).
03 FILLER PIC X.
03 T-SECOND PIC 9(2).
03 FILLER PIC XX.
02 SCORE-TXT PIC X(8).
02 FILLER PIC X.
02 SCANTIME PIC 9(6)V9.
02 FILLER PIC X.
02 BYTES PIC 9(12).
02 FILLER PIC X(34).
When running the program, all fields filled correctly. For
statistics, I want to do some calculations. To accomplish this, I defined:
WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
77 SCORE PIC S9(6)V99.
Later, in the PROCEDURE DIVISION, I do a MOVE:
MOVE SCORE-TXT TO SCORE.
By reading IBM GC28-6396-6 (ANSI COBOL from 1976), I maybe should rewrite:
77 SCORE PIC S9(6)V99
SIGN IS LEADING.
A Compilation yields:
IKF1037I-E SIGN INVALID IN DATA DESCRIPTION. SKIPPING TO NEXT CLAUSE.
IKF1037I-E IS INVALID IN DATA DESCRIPTION. SKIPPING TO NEXT CLAUSE.
IKF1037I-E LEADING INVALID IN DATA DESCRIPTION. SKIPPING TO NEXT
CLAUSE.
The only halfway applying external help also uses the SIGN clause.
d-numeric-with-real-decimal
If I leave out the complete SIGN clause, compilation is (again)
successful. A ?DISPLAY“ (to check if the fields are parsed
correctly) in the read-loop yields the following:
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 15h 51m 25s:
has 94652 B, and took 3.6 s to scan.
Score is 005.800{
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 17h 06m 38s:
has 19885 B, and took 7.2 s to scan.
Score is 001.800{
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 17h 08m 05s:
has 9007 B, and took 3.5 s to scan.
Score is 002.200{
- Why are there three digits after the decimal point?
- What is that { after the rightmost digit? This mysterious ?sign
overpunch“ I’ve been reading about?
- Note that this character stays the same, no matter if the input
number is positive or negative.
As soon as I want to use this variable for any calculation, the
program abends with a runtime error.
If I define the score variable slightly different, I surprisingly
get the right numbers!
77 SCORE PIC 9(8).
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 15h 51m 25s:
has 94652 B, and took 3.6 s to scan.
Score is 0005.80
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 17h 06m 38s:
has 19885 B, and took 7.2 s to scan.
Score is -0001.80
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 17h 08m 05s:
has 9007 B, and took 3.5 s to scan.
Score is -0002.20
I still can’t calculate with that variable.
Somewhere I’ve read that sometimes the sign is at the *end* of a
number in the US. So I changed my export to create records like this:
1 10 20 30 40 50
+---+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+
Jan 6 19:57:49 12.40- 3.3 51490
Jan 6 20:03:36 72.60+ 3.2 890
Field definition:
02 SCORE PIC S9(7)V99.
Output:
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 20h 34m 34s:
has 0 10340 B, and took 7 s to scan.
Score is 17.70
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 20h 38m 55s:
has 9 8 B, and took 9 s to scan.
Score is 52.00
No Sign, but garbled numbers (scan time, bytes). Is a sign only
showing up when the output number is edited?
For a test, I’m switching back to all definitions to be type X.
01 STATISTICS-INPILE-FORMAT.
02 MONTHNAME PIC A(3).
02 FILLER PIC X.
02 DAY-OF-MONTH PIC 9(2).
02 FILLER PIC X.
02 TIMESPEC.
03 T-HOUR PIC 9(2).
03 FILLER PIC X.
03 T-MINUTE PIC 9(2).
03 FILLER PIC X.
03 T-SECOND PIC 9(2).
03 FILLER PIC X.
02 SCORE-TXT PIC X(10).
02 FILLER PIC X.
02 SCANTIME PIC X(8).
02 FILLER PIC X.
02 BYTES PIC X(12).
02 FILLER PIC X(32).
and
WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
77 SCORE PIC S9(6)V99 VALUE ZERO
USAGE IS DISPLAY.
Compiles well, move works, output is:
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 20h 27m 43s:
has 29245 B, and took 5.7 s to scan.
Score is 0.8000{
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 20h 34m 34s:
has 1034035 B, and took 7.0 s to scan.
Score is 17.7000{
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 20h 38m 55s:
has 838 B, and took 9.9 s to scan.
Score is 52.0000{
For whatever reason I now have four digits after the decimal point,
and again the curly brace. Of course, I still can’t do calculations
with this
number: Runtime Error.
In business (obviously the B in COBOL), negative values are common.
But since the TK4- MVT compiler seems to even predate the document
mentioned above, I’m puzzled how to handle negative numbers.
May I ask kindly for a nudge in the right direction?
I have a complete JCL ready for uploading via external card reader
into the HERC03 account, deleting possible leftovers from a previous
run, and (re)creating all files as necessary, so potential helpers
will have it more easy to actually help. Available on request.
Thank you.
:wq! PoC
|
Re: COBOL in TK4-: Handling Signed Numbers
On 1/6/21 2:33 PM, Patrik Schindler wrote: Hello,
I have a sequential file with records being fed to it via external card reader. Works very well. I want to do some statistics with the data, so I want to use the (very old) COBOL compiler delivered with TK4-. I struggle with the format for getting the number parsed in the correct way in pos. 18 - 25.
Format:
* 1 10 20 30 40 50
* +---+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+
* Jan 6 17:03:30 0003.10 4.8 166039
* Jan 6 17:08:05 -0002.20 3.5 9007
Patrik, As others have said, the MVT COBOL compiler we have does not implement much in the way of sign handling for fields. A very long time ago I wrote some field pre/post processing routines for use with COBOL/CICS programs. One of these may help you with identifying the leading sign and converting the field to a packed field: jaymoseley.com/hercules/misc_pgms/miscpgms.htm
|
Re: [Marketing Mail] Re: [H390-MVS] COBOL in TK4-: Handling Signed Numbers
I agree with Joe.
You need to make sure the data is actually numbers – or you will get 0C7 –
?
Any number that is to be used in arithmetic calculations ?– should be checked – to avoid an abend –
-J-
?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
On Behalf Of Joe Monk
Sent: Wednesday, January 6, 2021 5:03 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Marketing Mail] Re: [H390-MVS] COBOL in TK4-: Handling Signed Numbers
?
You need to convert from zoned to packed decimal in order to do any arithmetic using those fields.
You can do arithmetic with zoned decimal fields.
?
I do not see "COMP-3" on any of your declarations.
COMP-3 is COBOL-speak for "packed decimal."
All of your fields are either character or zoned decimal.
You need to convert from zoned to packed decimal in order to do any arithmetic using those fields.
|
Re: COBOL in TK4-: Handling Signed Numbers
You need to convert from zoned to packed decimal in order to do any arithmetic using those fields.
Not true.
You can do arithmetic with zoned decimal fields.
Joe
I do not see "COMP-3" on any of your declarations.
COMP-3 is COBOL-speak for "packed decimal."
All of your fields are either character or zoned decimal.
You need to convert from zoned to packed decimal in order to do any arithmetic using those fields.
|
Re: COBOL in TK4-: Handling Signed Numbers
No, you can use zoned decimal in calculations no issue.
Joe
Joe,
I concur.? I was trying to delve some 40 years into my memory.
I seem to recall that Mark also makes a valid point.. You have to move
SCORE to a COMP-3 field in order to do numeric calculations.
Chris
--
?<cjar1950@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Wed, 6 Jan 2021 15:50:40 -0600
"Joe Monk" <joemonk64@...> wrote:
> Patrik,
>
> "77? SCORE? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? PIC S9(6)V99
>? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? SIGN IS LEADING."
>
> This is not valid for MVT Cobol. Just take off the "sign is leading".
>
> Now let me show you a trick:
>
> 02? SCORE-TXT? ? ? ? PIC X(10).
> 02 SCORE-NUM-R? ?REDEFINES SCORE-TXT.
>? ? ? 03? FILLER? ? ? ? ? ?PIC XX.
>? ? ? 03? SCORE-NUM PIC S9(6)v99.
>
> WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
> 77? SCORE? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? PIC ++++,+++.99? ?VALUE ZERO.
>
>
> Now do: MOVE SCORE-NUM TO SCORE.
>
> Joe
>
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 2:33 PM Patrik Schindler <poc@...> wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > I have a sequential file with records being fed to it via external card
> > reader. Works very well. I want to do some statistics with the data, so I
> > want to use the (very old) COBOL compiler delivered with TK4-. I struggle
> > with the format for getting the number parsed in the correct way in pos. 18
> > - 25.
> >
> > Format:
> > * 1? ? ? ?10? ? ? ? 20? ? ? ? 30? ? ? ? 40? ? ? ? 50
> > * +---+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+
> > * Jan? 6 17:03:30? ?0003.10? ? ?4.8? ? ? ?166039
> > * Jan? 6 17:08:05? -0002.20? ? ?3.5? ? ? ? ?9007
> >
> > (I have changed the preparation script on Linux to always do a zero-fill,
> > if this might have been the culprit. Not, it isn’t. Issue stays the same.)
> >
> > This is my current format description:
> >
> > 01? STATISTICS-INPILE-FORMAT.
> >? ? ?02? MONTHNAME? ? ? ? PIC A(3).
> >? ? ?02? FILLER? ? ? ? ? ?PIC X.
> >? ? ?02? DAY-OF-MONTH? ? ?PIC 9(2).
> >? ? ?02? FILLER? ? ? ? ? ?PIC X.
> >? ? ?02? TIMESPEC.
> >? ? ? ? ?03? T-HOUR? ? ? ?PIC 9(2).
> >? ? ? ? ?03? FILLER? ? ? ?PIC X.
> >? ? ? ? ?03? T-MINUTE? ? ?PIC 9(2).
> >? ? ? ? ?03? FILLER? ? ? ?PIC X.
> >? ? ? ? ?03? T-SECOND? ? ?PIC 9(2).
> >? ? ? ? ?03? FILLER? ? ? ?PIC XX.
> >? ? ?02? SCORE-TXT? ? ? ? PIC X(8).
> >? ? ?02? FILLER? ? ? ? ? ?PIC X.
> >? ? ?02? SCANTIME? ? ? ? ?PIC 9(6)V9.
> >? ? ?02? FILLER? ? ? ? ? ?PIC X.
> >? ? ?02? BYTES? ? ? ? ? ? PIC 9(12).
> >? ? ?02? FILLER? ? ? ? ? ?PIC X(34).
> >
> > When running the program, all fields filled correctly. For statistics, I
> > want to do some calculations. To accomplish this, I defined:
> >
> > WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
> > 77? SCORE? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? PIC S9(6)V99.
> >
> > Later, in the PROCEDURE DIVISION, I do a MOVE:
> > MOVE SCORE-TXT TO SCORE.
> >
> > By reading IBM GC28-6396-6 (ANSI COBOL from 1976), I maybe should rewrite:
> >
> > 77? SCORE? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? PIC S9(6)V99
> >? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? SIGN IS LEADING.
> >
> > A Compilation yields:
> >
> > IKF1037I-E? ? ?SIGN INVALID IN DATA DESCRIPTION. SKIPPING TO NEXT CLAUSE.
> > IKF1037I-E? ? ?IS INVALID IN DATA DESCRIPTION. SKIPPING TO NEXT CLAUSE.
> > IKF1037I-E? ? ?LEADING INVALID IN DATA DESCRIPTION. SKIPPING TO NEXT
> > CLAUSE.
> >
> > The only halfway applying external help also uses the SIGN clause.
> >
> >
> >
> > If I leave out the complete SIGN clause, compilation is (again)
> > successful. A ?DISPLAY“ (to check if the fields are parsed correctly) in
> > the read-loop yields the following:
> >
> > 20-Entry from Jan,? 6, 15h 51m 25s:
> >? has? ? ? ? 94652 B, and took? ? ?3.6 s to scan.
> >? Score is 005.800{
> > 20-Entry from Jan,? 6, 17h 06m 38s:
> >? has? ? ? ? 19885 B, and took? ? ?7.2 s to scan.
> >? Score is 001.800{
> > 20-Entry from Jan,? 6, 17h 08m 05s:
> >? has? ? ? ? ?9007 B, and took? ? ?3.5 s to scan.
> >? Score is 002.200{
> >
> > - Why are there three digits after the decimal point?
> > - What is that { after the rightmost digit? This mysterious ?sign
> > overpunch“ I’ve been reading about?
> > - Note that this character stays the same, no matter if the input number
> > is positive or negative.
> >
> > As soon as I want to use this variable for any calculation, the program
> > abends with a runtime error.
> >
> > If I define the score variable slightly different, I surprisingly get the
> > right numbers!
> > 77? SCORE? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? PIC 9(8).
> >
> > 20-Entry from Jan,? 6, 15h 51m 25s:
> >? has? ? ? ? 94652 B, and took? ? ?3.6 s to scan.
> >? Score is? 0005.80
> > 20-Entry from Jan,? 6, 17h 06m 38s:
> >? has? ? ? ? 19885 B, and took? ? ?7.2 s to scan.
> >? Score is -0001.80
> > 20-Entry from Jan,? 6, 17h 08m 05s:
> >? has? ? ? ? ?9007 B, and took? ? ?3.5 s to scan.
> >? Score is -0002.20
> >
> > I still can’t calculate with that variable.
> >
> > Somewhere I’ve read that sometimes the sign is at the *end* of a number in
> > the US. So I changed my export to create records like this:
> >
> > 1? ? ? ?10? ? ? ? 20? ? ? ? 30? ? ? ? 40? ? ? ? 50
> > +---+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+
> > Jan? 6 19:57:49? ? ?12.40-? ? ? 3.3? ? ? ? 51490
> > Jan? 6 20:03:36? ? ?72.60+? ? ? 3.2? ? ? ? ? 890
> >
> > Field definition:
> > 02? SCORE? ? ? ? ? ? PIC S9(7)V99.
> >
> > Output:
> > 20-Entry from Jan,? 6, 20h 34m 34s:
> >? has 0? ? ? 10340 B, and took? ? ? ?7 s to scan.
> >? Score is? ? ?17.70
> > 20-Entry from Jan,? 6, 20h 38m 55s:
> >? has 9? ? ? ? ? 8 B, and took? ? ? ?9 s to scan.
> >? Score is? ? ?52.00
> >
> > No Sign, but garbled numbers (scan time, bytes). Is a sign only showing up
> > when the output number is edited?
> >
> > For a test, I’m switching back to all definitions to be type X.
> >
> > 01? STATISTICS-INPILE-FORMAT.
> >? ? ?02? MONTHNAME? ? ? ? PIC A(3).
> >? ? ?02? FILLER? ? ? ? ? ?PIC X.
> >? ? ?02? DAY-OF-MONTH? ? ?PIC 9(2).
> >? ? ?02? FILLER? ? ? ? ? ?PIC X.
> >? ? ?02? TIMESPEC.
> >? ? ? ? ?03? T-HOUR? ? ? ?PIC 9(2).
> >? ? ? ? ?03? FILLER? ? ? ?PIC X.
> >? ? ? ? ?03? T-MINUTE? ? ?PIC 9(2).
> >? ? ? ? ?03? FILLER? ? ? ?PIC X.
> >? ? ? ? ?03? T-SECOND? ? ?PIC 9(2).
> >? ? ? ? ?03? FILLER? ? ? ?PIC X.
> >? ? ?02? SCORE-TXT? ? ? ? PIC X(10).
> >? ? ?02? FILLER? ? ? ? ? ?PIC X.
> >? ? ?02? SCANTIME? ? ? ? ?PIC X(8).
> >? ? ?02? FILLER? ? ? ? ? ?PIC X.
> >? ? ?02? BYTES? ? ? ? ? ? PIC X(12).
> >? ? ?02? FILLER? ? ? ? ? ?PIC X(32).
> >
> > and
> >
> > WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
> > 77? SCORE? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? PIC S9(6)V99? ?VALUE ZERO
> >? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?USAGE IS DISPLAY.
> >
> > Compiles well, move works, output is:
> >
> > 20-Entry from Jan,? 6, 20h 27m 43s:
> >? has? ? ? ? 29245 B, and took? ? ? 5.7 s to scan.
> >? Score is? 0.8000{
> > 20-Entry from Jan,? 6, 20h 34m 34s:
> >? has? ? ? 1034035 B, and took? ? ? 7.0 s to scan.
> >? Score is 17.7000{
> > 20-Entry from Jan,? 6, 20h 38m 55s:
> >? has? ? ? ? ? 838 B, and took? ? ? 9.9 s to scan.
> >? Score is 52.0000{
> >
> > For whatever reason I now have four digits after the decimal point, and
> > again the curly brace. Of course, I still can’t do calculations with this
> > number: Runtime Error.
> >
> > In business (obviously the B in COBOL), negative values are common. But
> > since the TK4- MVT compiler seems to even predate the document mentioned
> > above, I’m puzzled how to handle negative numbers.
> >
> > May I ask kindly for a nudge in the right direction?
> >
> > I have a complete JCL ready for uploading via external card reader into
> > the HERC03 account, deleting possible leftovers from a previous run, and
> > (re)creating all files as necessary, so potential helpers will have it more
> > easy to actually help. Available on request.
> >
> > Thank you.
> >
> > :wq! PoC
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
|
Re: COBOL in TK4-: Handling Signed Numbers
Joe, I concur. I was trying to delve some 40 years into my memory. I seem to recall that Mark also makes a valid point.. You have to move SCORE to a COMP-3 field in order to do numeric calculations. Chris -- <cjar1950@...> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- On Wed, 6 Jan 2021 15:50:40 -0600 "Joe Monk" <joemonk64@...> wrote: Patrik,
"77 SCORE PIC S9(6)V99
SIGN IS LEADING."
This is not valid for MVT Cobol. Just take off the "sign is leading".
Now let me show you a trick:
02 SCORE-TXT PIC X(10).
02 SCORE-NUM-R REDEFINES SCORE-TXT.
03 FILLER PIC XX.
03 SCORE-NUM PIC S9(6)v99.
WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
77 SCORE PIC ++++,+++.99 VALUE ZERO.
Now do: MOVE SCORE-NUM TO SCORE.
Joe
On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 2:33 PM Patrik Schindler <poc@...> wrote:
Hello,
I have a sequential file with records being fed to it via external card
reader. Works very well. I want to do some statistics with the data, so I
want to use the (very old) COBOL compiler delivered with TK4-. I struggle
with the format for getting the number parsed in the correct way in pos. 18
- 25.
Format:
* 1 10 20 30 40 50
* +---+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+
* Jan 6 17:03:30 0003.10 4.8 166039
* Jan 6 17:08:05 -0002.20 3.5 9007
(I have changed the preparation script on Linux to always do a zero-fill,
if this might have been the culprit. Not, it isn’t. Issue stays the same.)
This is my current format description:
01 STATISTICS-INPILE-FORMAT.
02 MONTHNAME PIC A(3).
02 FILLER PIC X.
02 DAY-OF-MONTH PIC 9(2).
02 FILLER PIC X.
02 TIMESPEC.
03 T-HOUR PIC 9(2).
03 FILLER PIC X.
03 T-MINUTE PIC 9(2).
03 FILLER PIC X.
03 T-SECOND PIC 9(2).
03 FILLER PIC XX.
02 SCORE-TXT PIC X(8).
02 FILLER PIC X.
02 SCANTIME PIC 9(6)V9.
02 FILLER PIC X.
02 BYTES PIC 9(12).
02 FILLER PIC X(34).
When running the program, all fields filled correctly. For statistics, I
want to do some calculations. To accomplish this, I defined:
WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
77 SCORE PIC S9(6)V99.
Later, in the PROCEDURE DIVISION, I do a MOVE:
MOVE SCORE-TXT TO SCORE.
By reading IBM GC28-6396-6 (ANSI COBOL from 1976), I maybe should rewrite:
77 SCORE PIC S9(6)V99
SIGN IS LEADING.
A Compilation yields:
IKF1037I-E SIGN INVALID IN DATA DESCRIPTION. SKIPPING TO NEXT CLAUSE.
IKF1037I-E IS INVALID IN DATA DESCRIPTION. SKIPPING TO NEXT CLAUSE.
IKF1037I-E LEADING INVALID IN DATA DESCRIPTION. SKIPPING TO NEXT
CLAUSE.
The only halfway applying external help also uses the SIGN clause.
If I leave out the complete SIGN clause, compilation is (again)
successful. A ?DISPLAY“ (to check if the fields are parsed correctly) in
the read-loop yields the following:
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 15h 51m 25s:
has 94652 B, and took 3.6 s to scan.
Score is 005.800{
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 17h 06m 38s:
has 19885 B, and took 7.2 s to scan.
Score is 001.800{
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 17h 08m 05s:
has 9007 B, and took 3.5 s to scan.
Score is 002.200{
- Why are there three digits after the decimal point?
- What is that { after the rightmost digit? This mysterious ?sign
overpunch“ I’ve been reading about?
- Note that this character stays the same, no matter if the input number
is positive or negative.
As soon as I want to use this variable for any calculation, the program
abends with a runtime error.
If I define the score variable slightly different, I surprisingly get the
right numbers!
77 SCORE PIC 9(8).
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 15h 51m 25s:
has 94652 B, and took 3.6 s to scan.
Score is 0005.80
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 17h 06m 38s:
has 19885 B, and took 7.2 s to scan.
Score is -0001.80
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 17h 08m 05s:
has 9007 B, and took 3.5 s to scan.
Score is -0002.20
I still can’t calculate with that variable.
Somewhere I’ve read that sometimes the sign is at the *end* of a number in
the US. So I changed my export to create records like this:
1 10 20 30 40 50
+---+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+
Jan 6 19:57:49 12.40- 3.3 51490
Jan 6 20:03:36 72.60+ 3.2 890
Field definition:
02 SCORE PIC S9(7)V99.
Output:
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 20h 34m 34s:
has 0 10340 B, and took 7 s to scan.
Score is 17.70
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 20h 38m 55s:
has 9 8 B, and took 9 s to scan.
Score is 52.00
No Sign, but garbled numbers (scan time, bytes). Is a sign only showing up
when the output number is edited?
For a test, I’m switching back to all definitions to be type X.
01 STATISTICS-INPILE-FORMAT.
02 MONTHNAME PIC A(3).
02 FILLER PIC X.
02 DAY-OF-MONTH PIC 9(2).
02 FILLER PIC X.
02 TIMESPEC.
03 T-HOUR PIC 9(2).
03 FILLER PIC X.
03 T-MINUTE PIC 9(2).
03 FILLER PIC X.
03 T-SECOND PIC 9(2).
03 FILLER PIC X.
02 SCORE-TXT PIC X(10).
02 FILLER PIC X.
02 SCANTIME PIC X(8).
02 FILLER PIC X.
02 BYTES PIC X(12).
02 FILLER PIC X(32).
and
WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
77 SCORE PIC S9(6)V99 VALUE ZERO
USAGE IS DISPLAY.
Compiles well, move works, output is:
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 20h 27m 43s:
has 29245 B, and took 5.7 s to scan.
Score is 0.8000{
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 20h 34m 34s:
has 1034035 B, and took 7.0 s to scan.
Score is 17.7000{
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 20h 38m 55s:
has 838 B, and took 9.9 s to scan.
Score is 52.0000{
For whatever reason I now have four digits after the decimal point, and
again the curly brace. Of course, I still can’t do calculations with this
number: Runtime Error.
In business (obviously the B in COBOL), negative values are common. But
since the TK4- MVT compiler seems to even predate the document mentioned
above, I’m puzzled how to handle negative numbers.
May I ask kindly for a nudge in the right direction?
I have a complete JCL ready for uploading via external card reader into
the HERC03 account, deleting possible leftovers from a previous run, and
(re)creating all files as necessary, so potential helpers will have it more
easy to actually help. Available on request.
Thank you.
:wq! PoC
|
Re: COBOL in TK4-: Handling Signed Numbers
Patrik,
"77? SCORE? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? PIC S9(6)V99
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?SIGN IS LEADING."
This is not valid for MVT Cobol. Just take off the "sign is leading".
Now let me show you a trick:
02? SCORE-TXT? ? ? ? PIC X(10).
02 SCORE-NUM-R ? REDEFINES SCORE-TXT. ? ? ?03 ?FILLER ? ? ? ? ? PIC XX.? ? ? ?03 ?SCORE-NUM PIC S9(6)v99.
WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
77? SCORE? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? PIC ++++,+++.99 ? VALUE ZERO.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ??
Now do: MOVE SCORE-NUM TO SCORE.
Joe
On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 2:33 PM Patrik Schindler < poc@...> wrote: Hello,
I have a sequential file with records being fed to it via external card reader. Works very well. I want to do some statistics with the data, so I want to use the (very old) COBOL compiler delivered with TK4-. I struggle with the format for getting the number parsed in the correct way in pos. 18 - 25.
Format:
* 1? ? ? ?10? ? ? ? 20? ? ? ? 30? ? ? ? 40? ? ? ? 50
* +---+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+
* Jan? 6 17:03:30? ?0003.10? ? ?4.8? ? ? ?166039
* Jan? 6 17:08:05? -0002.20? ? ?3.5? ? ? ? ?9007
(I have changed the preparation script on Linux to always do a zero-fill, if this might have been the culprit. Not, it isn’t. Issue stays the same.)
This is my current format description:
01? STATISTICS-INPILE-FORMAT.
? ? 02? MONTHNAME? ? ? ? PIC A(3).
? ? 02? FILLER? ? ? ? ? ?PIC X.
? ? 02? DAY-OF-MONTH? ? ?PIC 9(2).
? ? 02? FILLER? ? ? ? ? ?PIC X.
? ? 02? TIMESPEC.
? ? ? ? 03? T-HOUR? ? ? ?PIC 9(2).
? ? ? ? 03? FILLER? ? ? ?PIC X.
? ? ? ? 03? T-MINUTE? ? ?PIC 9(2).
? ? ? ? 03? FILLER? ? ? ?PIC X.
? ? ? ? 03? T-SECOND? ? ?PIC 9(2).
? ? ? ? 03? FILLER? ? ? ?PIC XX.
? ? 02? SCORE-TXT? ? ? ? PIC X(8).
? ? 02? FILLER? ? ? ? ? ?PIC X.
? ? 02? SCANTIME? ? ? ? ?PIC 9(6)V9.
? ? 02? FILLER? ? ? ? ? ?PIC X.
? ? 02? BYTES? ? ? ? ? ? PIC 9(12).
? ? 02? FILLER? ? ? ? ? ?PIC X(34).
When running the program, all fields filled correctly. For statistics, I want to do some calculations. To accomplish this, I defined:
WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
77? SCORE? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? PIC S9(6)V99.
Later, in the PROCEDURE DIVISION, I do a MOVE:
MOVE SCORE-TXT TO SCORE.
By reading IBM GC28-6396-6 (ANSI COBOL from 1976), I maybe should rewrite:
77? SCORE? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? PIC S9(6)V99
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?SIGN IS LEADING.
A Compilation yields:
IKF1037I-E? ? ?SIGN INVALID IN DATA DESCRIPTION. SKIPPING TO NEXT CLAUSE.
IKF1037I-E? ? ?IS INVALID IN DATA DESCRIPTION. SKIPPING TO NEXT CLAUSE.
IKF1037I-E? ? ?LEADING INVALID IN DATA DESCRIPTION. SKIPPING TO NEXT CLAUSE.
The only halfway applying external help also uses the SIGN clause.
If I leave out the complete SIGN clause, compilation is (again) successful. A ?DISPLAY“ (to check if the fields are parsed correctly) in the read-loop yields the following:
20-Entry from Jan,? 6, 15h 51m 25s:
?has? ? ? ? 94652 B, and took? ? ?3.6 s to scan.
?Score is 005.800{
20-Entry from Jan,? 6, 17h 06m 38s:
?has? ? ? ? 19885 B, and took? ? ?7.2 s to scan.
?Score is 001.800{
20-Entry from Jan,? 6, 17h 08m 05s:
?has? ? ? ? ?9007 B, and took? ? ?3.5 s to scan.
?Score is 002.200{
- Why are there three digits after the decimal point?
- What is that { after the rightmost digit? This mysterious ?sign overpunch“ I’ve been reading about?
- Note that this character stays the same, no matter if the input number is positive or negative.
As soon as I want to use this variable for any calculation, the program abends with a runtime error.
If I define the score variable slightly different, I surprisingly get the right numbers!
77? SCORE? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? PIC 9(8).
20-Entry from Jan,? 6, 15h 51m 25s:
?has? ? ? ? 94652 B, and took? ? ?3.6 s to scan.
?Score is? 0005.80
20-Entry from Jan,? 6, 17h 06m 38s:
?has? ? ? ? 19885 B, and took? ? ?7.2 s to scan.
?Score is -0001.80
20-Entry from Jan,? 6, 17h 08m 05s:
?has? ? ? ? ?9007 B, and took? ? ?3.5 s to scan.
?Score is -0002.20
I still can’t calculate with that variable.
Somewhere I’ve read that sometimes the sign is at the *end* of a number in the US. So I changed my export to create records like this:
1? ? ? ?10? ? ? ? 20? ? ? ? 30? ? ? ? 40? ? ? ? 50
+---+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+
Jan? 6 19:57:49? ? ?12.40-? ? ? 3.3? ? ? ? 51490?
Jan? 6 20:03:36? ? ?72.60+? ? ? 3.2? ? ? ? ? 890?
Field definition:
02? SCORE? ? ? ? ? ? PIC S9(7)V99.
Output:
20-Entry from Jan,? 6, 20h 34m 34s:
?has 0? ? ? 10340 B, and took? ? ? ?7 s to scan.
?Score is? ? ?17.70
20-Entry from Jan,? 6, 20h 38m 55s:
?has 9? ? ? ? ? 8 B, and took? ? ? ?9 s to scan.
?Score is? ? ?52.00
No Sign, but garbled numbers (scan time, bytes). Is a sign only showing up when the output number is edited?
For a test, I’m switching back to all definitions to be type X.
01? STATISTICS-INPILE-FORMAT.
? ? 02? MONTHNAME? ? ? ? PIC A(3).
? ? 02? FILLER? ? ? ? ? ?PIC X.
? ? 02? DAY-OF-MONTH? ? ?PIC 9(2).
? ? 02? FILLER? ? ? ? ? ?PIC X.
? ? 02? TIMESPEC.
? ? ? ? 03? T-HOUR? ? ? ?PIC 9(2).
? ? ? ? 03? FILLER? ? ? ?PIC X.
? ? ? ? 03? T-MINUTE? ? ?PIC 9(2).
? ? ? ? 03? FILLER? ? ? ?PIC X.
? ? ? ? 03? T-SECOND? ? ?PIC 9(2).
? ? ? ? 03? FILLER? ? ? ?PIC X.
? ? 02? SCORE-TXT? ? ? ? PIC X(10).
? ? 02? FILLER? ? ? ? ? ?PIC X.
? ? 02? SCANTIME? ? ? ? ?PIC X(8).
? ? 02? FILLER? ? ? ? ? ?PIC X.
? ? 02? BYTES? ? ? ? ? ? PIC X(12).
? ? 02? FILLER? ? ? ? ? ?PIC X(32).
and
WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
77? SCORE? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? PIC S9(6)V99? ?VALUE ZERO
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? USAGE IS DISPLAY.
Compiles well, move works, output is:
20-Entry from Jan,? 6, 20h 27m 43s:
?has? ? ? ? 29245 B, and took? ? ? 5.7 s to scan.
?Score is? 0.8000{
20-Entry from Jan,? 6, 20h 34m 34s:
?has? ? ? 1034035 B, and took? ? ? 7.0 s to scan.
?Score is 17.7000{
20-Entry from Jan,? 6, 20h 38m 55s:
?has? ? ? ? ? 838 B, and took? ? ? 9.9 s to scan.
?Score is 52.0000{
For whatever reason I now have four digits after the decimal point, and again the curly brace. Of course, I still can’t do calculations with this number: Runtime Error.
In business (obviously the B in COBOL), negative values are common. But since the TK4- MVT compiler seems to even predate the document mentioned above, I’m puzzled how to handle negative numbers.
May I ask kindly for a nudge in the right direction?
I have a complete JCL ready for uploading via external card reader into the HERC03 account, deleting possible leftovers from a previous run, and (re)creating all files as necessary, so potential helpers will have it more easy to actually help. Available on request.
Thank you.
:wq! PoC
|
Re: COBOL in TK4-: Handling Signed Numbers
I do not see "COMP-3" on any of your declarations.
COMP-3 is COBOL-speak for "packed decimal."
All of your fields are either character or zoned decimal.
You need to convert from zoned to packed decimal in order to do any arithmetic using those fields.
|
Re: COBOL in TK4-: Handling Signed Numbers
On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 12:33 PM, Patrik Schindler wrote:
A Compilation yields:
IKF1037I-E SIGN INVALID IN DATA DESCRIPTION. SKIPPING TO NEXT CLAUSE.
IKF1037I-E IS INVALID IN DATA DESCRIPTION. SKIPPING TO NEXT CLAUSE.
IKF1037I-E LEADING INVALID IN DATA DESCRIPTION. SKIPPING TO NEXT CLAUSE.
At the top of a COBOL listing on TK4-, I can see "CB545 V2 LVL78 01MAY72" which leads me to believe we have Version 2. The SIGN clause appeared in Versions 3 or 4 (see top of page 128 of GC28-6396-6). Could this explain the error message?
?
Rene FERLAND, Montreal
?
|
COBOL in TK4-: Handling Signed Numbers
Hello,
I have a sequential file with records being fed to it via external card reader. Works very well. I want to do some statistics with the data, so I want to use the (very old) COBOL compiler delivered with TK4-. I struggle with the format for getting the number parsed in the correct way in pos. 18 - 25.
Format:
* 1 10 20 30 40 50
* +---+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+
* Jan 6 17:03:30 0003.10 4.8 166039
* Jan 6 17:08:05 -0002.20 3.5 9007
(I have changed the preparation script on Linux to always do a zero-fill, if this might have been the culprit. Not, it isn’t. Issue stays the same.)
This is my current format description:
01 STATISTICS-INPILE-FORMAT.
02 MONTHNAME PIC A(3).
02 FILLER PIC X.
02 DAY-OF-MONTH PIC 9(2).
02 FILLER PIC X.
02 TIMESPEC.
03 T-HOUR PIC 9(2).
03 FILLER PIC X.
03 T-MINUTE PIC 9(2).
03 FILLER PIC X.
03 T-SECOND PIC 9(2).
03 FILLER PIC XX.
02 SCORE-TXT PIC X(8).
02 FILLER PIC X.
02 SCANTIME PIC 9(6)V9.
02 FILLER PIC X.
02 BYTES PIC 9(12).
02 FILLER PIC X(34).
When running the program, all fields filled correctly. For statistics, I want to do some calculations. To accomplish this, I defined:
WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
77 SCORE PIC S9(6)V99.
Later, in the PROCEDURE DIVISION, I do a MOVE:
MOVE SCORE-TXT TO SCORE.
By reading IBM GC28-6396-6 (ANSI COBOL from 1976), I maybe should rewrite:
77 SCORE PIC S9(6)V99
SIGN IS LEADING.
A Compilation yields:
IKF1037I-E SIGN INVALID IN DATA DESCRIPTION. SKIPPING TO NEXT CLAUSE.
IKF1037I-E IS INVALID IN DATA DESCRIPTION. SKIPPING TO NEXT CLAUSE.
IKF1037I-E LEADING INVALID IN DATA DESCRIPTION. SKIPPING TO NEXT CLAUSE.
The only halfway applying external help also uses the SIGN clause.
If I leave out the complete SIGN clause, compilation is (again) successful. A ?DISPLAY“ (to check if the fields are parsed correctly) in the read-loop yields the following:
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 15h 51m 25s:
has 94652 B, and took 3.6 s to scan.
Score is 005.800{
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 17h 06m 38s:
has 19885 B, and took 7.2 s to scan.
Score is 001.800{
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 17h 08m 05s:
has 9007 B, and took 3.5 s to scan.
Score is 002.200{
- Why are there three digits after the decimal point?
- What is that { after the rightmost digit? This mysterious ?sign overpunch“ I’ve been reading about?
- Note that this character stays the same, no matter if the input number is positive or negative.
As soon as I want to use this variable for any calculation, the program abends with a runtime error.
If I define the score variable slightly different, I surprisingly get the right numbers!
77 SCORE PIC 9(8).
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 15h 51m 25s:
has 94652 B, and took 3.6 s to scan.
Score is 0005.80
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 17h 06m 38s:
has 19885 B, and took 7.2 s to scan.
Score is -0001.80
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 17h 08m 05s:
has 9007 B, and took 3.5 s to scan.
Score is -0002.20
I still can’t calculate with that variable.
Somewhere I’ve read that sometimes the sign is at the *end* of a number in the US. So I changed my export to create records like this:
1 10 20 30 40 50
+---+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+
Jan 6 19:57:49 12.40- 3.3 51490
Jan 6 20:03:36 72.60+ 3.2 890
Field definition:
02 SCORE PIC S9(7)V99.
Output:
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 20h 34m 34s:
has 0 10340 B, and took 7 s to scan.
Score is 17.70
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 20h 38m 55s:
has 9 8 B, and took 9 s to scan.
Score is 52.00
No Sign, but garbled numbers (scan time, bytes). Is a sign only showing up when the output number is edited?
For a test, I’m switching back to all definitions to be type X.
01 STATISTICS-INPILE-FORMAT.
02 MONTHNAME PIC A(3).
02 FILLER PIC X.
02 DAY-OF-MONTH PIC 9(2).
02 FILLER PIC X.
02 TIMESPEC.
03 T-HOUR PIC 9(2).
03 FILLER PIC X.
03 T-MINUTE PIC 9(2).
03 FILLER PIC X.
03 T-SECOND PIC 9(2).
03 FILLER PIC X.
02 SCORE-TXT PIC X(10).
02 FILLER PIC X.
02 SCANTIME PIC X(8).
02 FILLER PIC X.
02 BYTES PIC X(12).
02 FILLER PIC X(32).
and
WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
77 SCORE PIC S9(6)V99 VALUE ZERO
USAGE IS DISPLAY.
Compiles well, move works, output is:
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 20h 27m 43s:
has 29245 B, and took 5.7 s to scan.
Score is 0.8000{
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 20h 34m 34s:
has 1034035 B, and took 7.0 s to scan.
Score is 17.7000{
20-Entry from Jan, 6, 20h 38m 55s:
has 838 B, and took 9.9 s to scan.
Score is 52.0000{
For whatever reason I now have four digits after the decimal point, and again the curly brace. Of course, I still can’t do calculations with this number: Runtime Error.
In business (obviously the B in COBOL), negative values are common. But since the TK4- MVT compiler seems to even predate the document mentioned above, I’m puzzled how to handle negative numbers.
May I ask kindly for a nudge in the right direction?
I have a complete JCL ready for uploading via external card reader into the HERC03 account, deleting possible leftovers from a previous run, and (re)creating all files as necessary, so potential helpers will have it more easy to actually help. Available on request.
Thank you.
:wq! PoC
|
Re: REVIEW/RFE profile management change proposal
I think mine is too old…. ? Dave ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Juergen
Sent: 06 January 2021 12:41
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [H390-MVS] REVIEW/RFE profile management change proposal? Hi Dave
sure:
You must make sure that the Microsoft CryptoAPI is activated when you are using an older PCOM version that still offers a choice between IBM's and Microsoft's API. Also, you need to trust the (self signed) certificat wotho4 uses (PCOM is quite picky on that, other emulators just accept everything that comes along).
Cheers
闯ü谤驳别苍
|
Re: REVIEW/RFE profile management change proposal
Thanks Greg, that works.
Now to work out how to do the same via x3270 onscreen interface.
Vince
On 06/01/2021 02:38, Greg Price wrote:
On 2021-01-06 8:58 AM, Vince Coen
wrote:
Just
retried using windows Vista nt3270
The following settings work for me:
Cheers,
Greg
--
- IMPORTANT –
This email and the information in it may be confidential, legally
privileged and/or protected by law.
It is intended solely for the use of the person to whom it is addressed.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender
immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it
for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Please
also delete all copies of this email & any attachments from your systems.
If this is an encrypted email, it is your responsibility to maintain the
1024 byte key system even for one-use keys. Once mail has been sent the
sending key is not kept and therefore a replacement mail cannot be resent.
We cannot guarantee the security or confidentiality of non encrypted email
communications. We do not accept any liability for losses or damages that
you may suffer as a result of your receipt of this email including but
not limited to computer service or system failure, access delays or
interruption, data non-delivery or mis-delivery, computer viruses or other
harmful components.
Copyright in this email and any attachments belongs to Applewood Computers.
Should you communicate with anyone at Applewood Computers by email,
you consent to us monitoring and reading any such correspondence.
Nothing in this email shall be taken or read as suggesting, proposing or
relating to any agreement concerted practice or other practice that could
infringe UK competition legislation (unless it is against Security
requirements).
This Email and its attachments (if any) are scanned for virii using
Clamd and ClamAV 0.102.4 or later (Linux x64) and others on IBM mainframe
systems.
Dykegrove Limited T/A Applewood Computers is a company registered in
England (no. 01681349) whose registered office is at Applewood House,
17 Stag Green Avenue, Hatfield, Hertfordshire, AL9 5EB
|
Re: REVIEW/RFE profile management change proposal
On 06/01/2021 12:20, Juergen wrote:
As Linux x3270 has no response when connecting with
Y::wotho4.ethz.ch:3270
Hi Vince
I'd say, your x3270 call has one colon too much: It should be Y:wotho4.ethz.ch:3270, not Y::wotho4.ethz.ch:3270.
No that was just my typing error as I could not cut and paste between the two tools and my eyes did not spot it :( Vince .
|
Re: REVIEW/RFE profile management change proposal
Hi Dave sure:  You must make sure that the Microsoft CryptoAPI is activated when you are using an older PCOM version that still offers a choice between IBM's and Microsoft's API. Also, you need to trust the (self signed) certificat wotho4 uses (PCOM is quite picky on that, other emulators just accept everything that comes along). Cheers 闯ü谤驳别苍
|
Re: REVIEW/RFE profile management change proposal
Is there a way to connect with IBM PCOMMS Dave ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Juergen
Sent: 06 January 2021 12:20
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [H390-MVS] REVIEW/RFE profile management change proposal? As Linux x3270 has no response when connecting with
Y::wotho4.ethz.ch:3270
Hi Vince
I'd say, your x3270 call has one colon too much: It should be Y:wotho4.ethz.ch:3270, not Y::wotho4.ethz.ch:3270.
Cheers
闯ü谤驳别苍
|
Re: REVIEW/RFE profile management change proposal
As Linux x3270 has no response when connecting with
Y::wotho4.ethz.ch:3270
Hi Vince I'd say, your x3270 call has one colon too much: It should be Y:wotho4.ethz.ch:3270, not Y::wotho4.ethz.ch:3270. Cheers 闯ü谤驳别苍
|
Re: REVIEW/RFE profile management change proposal
On 2021-01-06 8:58 AM, Vince Coen
wrote:
Just
retried using windows Vista nt3270
The following settings work for me:
Cheers,
Greg
|
Re: REVIEW/RFE profile management change proposal
"Vince Coen" <vbcoen@...> writes: As Linux x3270 has no response when connecting with
Y::wotho4.ethz.ch:3270 Just retried using windows Vista nt3270
No connection , just times out.
Is it operational or sufferin I just tried it just a little while ago. No problems from my location. try "x3270 -noverifycert L:wotho4.ethz.ch:3270" That should get you the login screen unless less a firewall or other connection impediment prevents connecting. Did you check that the path is clear. Try 'ping' or maybe traceroute. There may be a broken route between you and the destination machine. Bill Doughty N2OCM Retired MVS and UNIX/Linux SysAdmin <#secure method=pgpmime mode=sign>
|
Jeff Bassett
René Ferland