In a recent note, Joe Zitzelberger said: > Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 00:56:23 -0400 > > > The original point was that "an application programmer writing in > COBOL...should not know it is possible for programs to be invoked by > anything other than EXEC PGM=". Considering the prevalence of the CALL > statement in common COBOL usage, that claim cannot be valid. There are > may ways, other than "EXEC PGM=", for a program to receive control -- > and programmers know it. > > I can't really answer your 'main program' comment because there is no > such thing in the z/OS COBOL world. There is nothing special that > distinguishes a "main" program from any other program. If a program > can be invoked via JCL it can be invoked via call. The parms, as shown > above, can easily be identical for either JCL or call, and there is no > special way for a callee to know how it was invoked. > Does COBOL's CALL, like TSO's CALL limit the PARM passed to 100 characters?
> There is an odd, unusual, COBOL keyword that can force a program never > to return -- not exactly a 'main', but halfway there in spirit. If you > use 'STOP RUN' instead of 'GOBACK' or 'EXIT PROGRAM' you convert the > effect of a CALL into an XCTL. The effect isn't noticed when a program > is invoked via EXEC PGM=. > Is this analogous to issuing SVC 3? (BTW, what RM documents SVC 3?) -- gil -- StorageTek INFORMATION made POWERFUL ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
