IBM Mainframe Forum

Hello,

As i was "Code"ing the stuff, i noticed that the blksize in the "dataset info" is 32760 but the BLOCK CONTAINS says BLOCK CONTAINS 4096 CHARACTERS . . .

Also, unless specifically requested, one should not post an entire compile or a dump, etc. . .

What a truly horrible program.

Typically, the comments are useless. DB2? Not a sign of it.

File-status specified, but never checked.

The author/updater(s) don't know much about Cobol, see the use of EXIT. See the PERFORM "some-exit-para". See the exit para with some code on. Reference modification abounds. More useless comments in the program. Idiotic data-names (WS-77-K, where over 90% of the name is useless duplication with many others). Repetitions of code. Inconsistent use of END- structures. Blanks before periods in data division. Yoy.

dick scherrer wrote:... As i was "Code"ing the stuff, i noticed that the blksize in the "dataset info" is 32760 but the BLOCK CONTAINS says BLOCK CONTAINS 4096 CHARACTERS . . .

That was the reason (well, one of them) for VBS: to allow very long logical records in small physical records. This also made sense in terms of 1968 tape hardware: the best drive at the time could correct a single bit error, and it was less likely a relatively short block would have multiple bit errors.

Hi ,

Apology for not being more precise. I will look into the coding again .Again apology for not including the entire codings in the code tags.


Thanks all for valuable suggestions.

Regards,
Jaggz

Hi Steve,

Yup, i'm familiar with VBS.

I suspect that the program has to conform with the actual file. Had the BLOCK CONTAINS been left out of the code, it might have been ok, but as specified they seem to be in conflict. Possibly the system forgives this?

Hi Dick -

I agree, but with my extremely limited knowledge of Cobol I would not have posted a comment, especially considering the source of the original post.

Steve M