If you have to deal with XPLINK then you should use EDCPRLG, otherwise if
you just need LE compliance USE CEEENTRY.

Regards,
John

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 11:00 PM, ASSEMBLER-LIST automatic digest system <
[email protected]> wrote:

> There are 2 messages totaling 67 lines in this issue.
>
> Topics of the day:
>
>   1. CEEENTRY vs. EDCPRLG for a "general" LE enabled HLASM subroutine? (2)
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date:    Tue, 18 Jul 2017 11:11:02 -0500
> From:    John McKown <[email protected]>
> Subject: CEEENTRY vs. EDCPRLG for a "general" LE enabled HLASM subroutine?
>
> I have gotten into the habit of using CEEENTRY MAIN=YES for my HLASM main
> routines and MAIN=NO for subroutines (exit code excluded, of course). But I
> was just wondering if there would be any advantage to using EDCPRLG instead
> of CEEENTRY.
>
> The book that I'm reading is not really explicit about whether EDCPRLG can
> be used for an HLASM "main" routine which invokes C subroutines, or is only
> for HLASM "subroutines" which are invoked by C routines (and I guess can
> invoke C subroutines in turn).
>
> I'm guessing that CEEENTRY is "better" in the general case. I.e. something
> which is to be callable from C, FORTRAN, COBOL, or PL/I.
>
> --
> Veni, Vidi, VISA: I came, I saw, I did a little shopping.
>
> Maranatha! <><
> John McKown
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date:    Tue, 18 Jul 2017 22:37:45 +0100
> From:    Dougie Lawson <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: CEEENTRY vs. EDCPRLG for a "general" LE enabled HLASM
> subroutine?
>
> I think you should stick with CEEENTRY as that's runtime environment
> agnostic. CEEENTRY works in batch, IMS, OMVS, DB2 Stored Procs, etc.
>
> Regards, Dougie
>
> On 18 July 2017 at 17:11, John McKown <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > I have gotten into the habit of using CEEENTRY MAIN=YES for my HLASM main
> > routines and MAIN=NO for subroutines (exit code excluded, of course).
> But I
> > was just wondering if there would be any advantage to using EDCPRLG
> instead
> > of CEEENTRY.
> >
> > The book that I'm reading is not really explicit about whether EDCPRLG
> can
> > be used for an HLASM "main" routine which invokes C subroutines, or is
> only
> > for HLASM "subroutines" which are invoked by C routines (and I guess can
> > invoke C subroutines in turn).
> >
> > I'm guessing that CEEENTRY is "better" in the general case. I.e.
> something
> > which is to be callable from C, FORTRAN, COBOL, or PL/I.
> >
> > --
> > Veni, Vidi, VISA: I came, I saw, I did a little shopping.
> >
> > Maranatha! <><
> > John McKown
> >
>
>
>
> --
> http://twitter.com/DougieLawson
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of ASSEMBLER-LIST Digest - 3 Jul 2017 to 18 Jul 2017 (#2017-73)
> *******************************************************************
>



-- 
This message (and reply) was read by Google and the NSA.

Reply via email to