ISPF rants

Here is a list of a few of the things that bug me about working with ISPF on the mainframe:

1. People who haven't used a new ISPF feature since 3.4 came out.  Come on guys, it's been 20 years!
2. People who don't use Edit HILITE command.  Yes, green is a lovely colour, but it is surprising how much more productive you are when your source code is intelligently colour coded.  You'll never forget an END-IF again.
3. People who are still using 24x80 to do everything.  No wonder people think that the mainframe sucks!
4. Vendor panels that don't support large screen sizes.
5. People who use Extra!'s default colour scheme.  Yecchh!!
6. Companies that force you to use inferior emulators because that's the one they've always used.  There are many excellent and inexpensive emulators out there.  Vista 3270 for example.
7. People who don't know about the Edit COMPARE command and still do their code retrofits manually.
8. Systems programmers who fail to activate SITECMDS and USERCMDS.
9. Systems programmers who fail to include new products on the local panels.  I hate having to remember startup commands.
10. Panels with the command line at the bottom.
11. Dialog Tag Language.  A solution in search of a problem.
12. Local ISPF panels that point to obsolete products and functions.  
13. Non-modifiable KEYLISTs.  The "P" in PFK stands for "Programmable", dammit, so let me program my function keys!!
14. Missing HELP panels.  ISPF has a lot of very nice features to help the dialog developer create context-sensitive help dialogs.  Why aren't they used more often?
15. Panels that are all in CAPITALS.  Why do so many panels SHOUT at me?
16. People who don't know how to use the HELP key.
17. Dialog programmers who don't know how to use the MODEL command.

ISPF productivity

I love ISPF, I really do.  The Editor in particular is a brilliant piece of work, and in my opinion represents the gold standard for text-based editors.  ISPF also provides a very rich API so those that are conversant with ISPF dialog progamming can create useful and sometimes very complex applications. Yeah, those applications are text-based, but since most mainframe programming is done in a text-based world that doesn't matter.

I have written many such applications, and truth be told, it's a lot more fun to write ISPF Dialogs than to write Cobol code.  

Still, ISPF has its shortcomings.  The product uses hierarchical menus that require skill and experience to navigate.  To be sure, there are many short cuts, but it takes time to learn them.  Also, it does not provide a convenient mechanism for organizing the myriad of data sets, DB2 tables, IMS data bases and TSO commands that the programmer has to cope with every day.

I once wrote an ISPF Dialog application that helped me manage all of that stuff, and I was amazed how much time you could save if you aren't constantly searching for half-remembered data set names.   I've used such a tool for many years now, but more recently I've been relying on a commercial product called Simplist, which is way better than anything I've been able to write for myself. It's not free, but it's not expensive either.  I highly recommend it.

Don't believe me?  This guy likes it too.

Disclaimer: I have written about SimpList on several occasions.  I would like to point out that I have no financial interest in SimpList or any other commercial software product.  My opinion is that of an experienced mainframe developer and consultant, not a product shill.  My product review was originally published in Technical Support, the official journal of the Network and Systems Professionals Association (NaSPA).

ISPF weirdness

It's not a bad idea to add an explanatory line near the top of each scrollable HELP panel:

"Press LEFT and RIGHT to scroll up and down"

Or, depending on your audience:

"Press LEFT and RIGHT to scroll up and down. No, I am not kidding."

ISPF survey

Asked on ISPF-L:

Who uses the panels you develop and support?

Other programmers, mostly.

Do you continue to create new panels or is your panel library fairly static?

I create new ones on a regular basis.

Are you a private company or a government agency?

I am a self-employed consultant, currently working for a government agency.

Is there any other product you use to generate panels in ISPF?

No. I have never felt the need for one.

Do you think it wise to migrate to DTL or would that be akin to walking to the edge of mount doom with my precious?

No. I would rather put my command line at the bottom of the screen than use DTL.

Why FTP?

I have never understood the fascination with FTP. If all you want to do is transfer files between z/OS and a Windows workstation, then ISPF's Work Station Agent (WSA) works great. It's simple to use, fast and secure. Best of all, you can automate it using Rexx or any other language that supports ISPF dialog services.

See this link if you want to learn more about WSA.

Still not convinced? See this one too.

IPT vs ISPF

I find this link interesting because IBM appears to be rubbishing ISPF in order to promote IPT

ftp://ftp.software.ibm.com/software/...Comparison.pdf

Straw men walking! 

Feeling young

Hearing old timers talk about TSO edit makes me feel young. (A rare pleasure that is getting rarer).

I was one of the first generation of programmers to have the privilege of using SPF right at the start of my career. During my entry level training, the topic of TSO was glossed over; I never even had to learn TSO Edit.

This was back in 1981, when it was called SPF (Structured Programming Facility). A few years later it was re-branded as ISPF (Interactive Structured Programming Facility...."Interactive" being the buzzword of the day).

Then, sometime in the late 1980s ISPF became "Integrated Systems Productivity Facility". "Integrated" was a fashionable buzzword at the time, and IBM decided that ISPF wasn't just for "Programming" any more.

Nowadays the official name of the product is "Interactive System Productivity Facility". Whatever happened to "Integrated"? Perhaps I have my chronology wrong.

Your memories may vary.  (Mine vary from day to day).

I think I first saw option 3.4 in 1986 +- 1 year or so. I didn't like it very much...real programmers knew all of their data set names, so who needs 3.4? (Twenty years later, I am hooked on SimpList, a product which is like 3.4 on steroids).

I remember when you had to hit RETURN rather than ENTER in order to use a Jump function. I also remember complaining when they changed that, but I soon got used to it.