Re: [netrexx-pipelines] NetRexx Pipelines Stages Documentation

[<hp...@we...>]

Jeff!

Am 05.07.2022 um 02:42 schrieb Jeff Hennick:
> The complicated *SPECs* stage has complicated, and I find in places
> contradictory, documentation in the IBM publications.

So you did report to IBM the contradictions you found, I assume.

> I am going into detail here, but the problem as I see it, is misreading the
> description of an /input-source/ format (right justified for *NUMBER*) for an
> /output placement/ (truncated on the right to the specified field width by default).

Your detailed documentation of all relevant descriptions about
specs' recno/number placement shows clearly, if you copy CMS
Pipelines you have to observe _all_ references in IBM's manuals.
In contrast, for me the "right justified" in Chapter 23 was enough
to doubt your hint "without documenting it" within note #7 for the
specs stage deviants from the "exemplar".

> The _User's Guide and Reference Version 7 Revision 1_ would seem to be the most
> current.

I skip all details which are _not_ self-contradictory for me.

> [...]
> In the */spec /Tutorial* on page 174 we have the example of all this coming
> together in
>
>      Figure 285. Number and Literal
>
>      specs number 1.5 left /*/ next
>
>      with
>
>      input record
>      	output record
>      First record 	1 *
>      Second record 	2 *
>
> *it is my contention that this is not in agreement with the Reference.  Why is
> it taking the last 5 characters of 10 input and not the first ones?  Apparently
> it is only NUMBER/RECNO that exhibits this behavior.*

Honestly, considering all the details you mentioned before, I was
astonished. It smells as if blanks are stripped before placement.
Then, scrolling back from page 174 to 173, last paragraph, second
to last phrase: "When you use a placement option, the input field
is stripped of blanks before it is placed." -- No comment.

> Your other comments, I agree with totally.

One was not a comment but a query: where to find the documentation
(part/chapter/page) of NetRexx Pipelines specs stage placement
defaults, alleged in note #7 for specs in upcoming revision of the
list of differences to the role model.

> [...]
> I mention the Author's Edition only because someone, you-?-, brought it into the
> discussion.  I consider it outdated and depreciated.

Agreed, it definitely is dated. Without access to an up-to-date
z/VM it's the one corresponding to the youngest "field-test"
distribution at http://vm.marist.edu/%7Epipeline/ I may use. Thus,
it would be sufficing if NetRexx Pipelines complies with that
release -- at least for me ;)

Best,
M.