On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 10:42:47 -0800, Edward Jaffe <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 2/11/2013 7:59 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote: >> On Feb 11, 2013, at 08:37, Bill Fairchild wrote: >> >>> In order to make a simple trick like this easy to maintain by someone else in the future, or even myself (since my intricately detailed memory is rather short-lived), I would want to write so much documentation into the code that I would rather spend much less time and write three copies of the macro to make the code triple-pathed. >>> >> Dismayingly, when there are multiple options, the multiplicity >> grows exponentially. > >The MF=M form of RACROUTE is sooo nice for situations like this. I wish all >macros had that! Drat. I was just about to mention that, but you beat me to it. :) We discovered gil's issue back during the design for MVS 3.1.3, with some of the new RACROUTE options and some exploiters (particularly JES) who needed to be able to issue the macro with a wide variety of different options depending on the exact circumstances, and did not want to write multiple code paths. We found it was easier overall to provide MF=M so they could modify individual parameters, before finally issuing MF=E to actually execute it. They might have one MF=L form with the common set of parameters, and then code with several different MF=M invocations to set unique parameters as needed, and finally one MF=E. That made it much easier to add the RACROUTE requests into their code. -- Walt
