In 4e29ebb7.3000...@ync.net, on 07/22/2011
at 04:29 PM, Rick Fochtman rfocht...@ync.net said:
But you must admit that sometimes they're mildly amusing. In rare
instances, they're downright hilarious. :-)
Only if I don't have to clean up after people who listened to them :-(
But, yes, when
In snt113-w585822f589ad61188d3f50c6...@phx.gbl, on 07/21/2011
at 05:19 PM, john gilmore john_w_gilm...@msn.com said:
Samuel is useful and even diverting when someone else's ox is being
gored.
If Jane can't even get names right, it's no wonder that he missed the
point.
in the MVS-specific
In
of9f21e079.799a0575-on852578d4.0057e593-862578d4.00582...@csc.com,
on 07/21/2011
at 11:02 AM, John P Kalinich jkali...@csc.com said:
IIRC, the technique recommended by IBM was to use the ENQ macro
before modifying RENT code.
That works well for large blocks of code, but CS is useful for
snip--
You're right, I don't suffer fools gladly.
-unsnip
But you must admit that sometimes they're mildly amusing. In rare
instances, they're
In snt113-w225ae423b76930781f515c6...@phx.gbl, on 07/20/2011
at 07:52 PM, john gilmore john_w_gilm...@msn.com said:
Initially in an IBM mainframe environment a reentrant program could
modify itself, usually at initial-load time, if it held a global lock
while it did so; and this is the chief
On 21 July 2011 11:45, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote:
In snt113-w225ae423b76930781f515c6...@phx.gbl, on 07/20/2011
at 07:52 PM, john gilmore john_w_gilm...@msn.com said:
Initially in an IBM mainframe environment a reentrant program could
modify itself, usually at
Subject:Re: REENTRANT vs THREADSAFE
Samuel is useful and even diverting when someone else's ox is being gored.
This time I find his reminder that there were no locks, in the MVS-specific
sense, in OS/360 tedious at best; my usage was ironic and ought to have been
obvious in context; but Samuel is a natural force; no rhetoric
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of John McKown
Just to be my usual self. In general in CS, reentrant does not mean
non-self modifying. Many programs which do not modify themselves are
still not reentrant due to uncoordinated updating of shared
Answered in the Wikipedia article.
quote
Relation to thread safety
It must not be confused with thread-safe. A function can be thread-safe and
still not reentrant. For example, a function could be wrapped all around with a
mutex which avoids problems in multi-threading environments, and if that
Worth noting explicitly is that the CICS alternatives are
o THREADSAFE and
o QUASIRENT.
Long before IBM COBOL compilers could generate reentrant code COBOL was made
usable for CICS APs by trickery. The pointer to working storage--There was as
yet no stack-based local storage, and COBOL
11 matches
Mail list logo
