On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 10:53 PM, Robert A. Rosenberg <[email protected]> wrote: > At 13:23 -0500 on 03/23/2015, John McKown wrote about Re: (Regular > Expressions followup): > >> There is a big >> problem with the desire to advance versus the desire to continue to >> use what already works. As an example, look at some of the posts in >> IBM-MAIN about COBOL 5 requiring that the executable be in a PDSE and >> impossible to run from a PDS. > > > What is generated by the COBOL 5 compiler that that requires the use of a > PDS/E > to store the Program Object as opposed to placing it as a Load Module in a > PDS? If the requirement is about the compiler itself, what is its structure > that requires a PDS/E?
ref: http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg27041176 <quote> The need for PDSE datasets and Program Objects are built into the very core of COBOL V5. Just a few examples of features that COBOL V5 uses and will use that require Program Objects(PO) and thus PDSE datasets for executables are: Improved init/term scheme relies on user-defined classes in object, requiring PO QY-con requires PO (A performance improvement for RXY (long displacement) instructions. Condition-sequential RLD support requires PO A performance improvement for bootstrap invocation PO can get page mapped 4K at a time for better performance NOLOAD class DWARF debugging data requires PO Common reentrancy model with C/C++ requires PO XPLINK requires PO and will be used for AMODE 64 </quote> -- If you sent twitter messages while exploring, are you on a textpedition? He's about as useful as a wax frying pan. 10 to the 12th power microphones = 1 Megaphone Maranatha! <>< John McKown
