On 3/17/2011 4:28 PM, McKown, John wrote:
Another difficult part is efficiency. I want my routines to be "dynamic" in that I don't want them to be linked (bound) into the user's application. But I don't want the overhead of a lot of LINK invocations. Now, I guess this means that I could have a stub bound to the user's code. My macros would vector to the stub which would do a LOAD if necessary, then do a BASSM to actually go to my code (in order to be AMODE/RMODE agnostic). Again, does this sound reasonable?
I wrote something a little like that in the seventies, except that I required explicit initialization and termination calls. I used R5 and R6 in the JSTCB SA as an id and anchor. A master control routine provides basic services (LOAD, DELETE, etc.), while loadable modules provide input, output, and print functions. While it's been heavily modified (e.g., the input routine now supports unlike concatenation, and VSAM), it's still in daily use. All services have corresponding macros (or one macro with a function name). I last modified it to run under OS/390, and now am migrating back to MVS 3.8 for my own use. Gerhard Postpischil Bradford, VT
