You are correct in that an optimal situation exists when necessary dynamic storage can be supplied to a reentrant program by the caller.
However, that is not ALWAYS the case. My objection is to the use of the term "ALWAYS". To paraphrase something read years ago, "THE ONLY ABSOLUTE IS THAT THERE ARE NO ABSOLUTES." John P Baker Software Engineer -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeffrey D Smith Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2006 12:24 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Is the teaching of non-reentrant HLASM coding practices ever defensible? A reentrant program need not use GETMAIN/FREEMAIN/STORAGE. I've written zillions of reentrant routines that rely on the caller to provide a work area or that rely on pre-allocated storage areas (usually PC routines). Using pre-allocated or caller-specified work areas is extremely fast. If a caller provides a work area that is allocated within itself, then the caller is non-reentrant, but the called routine is still reentrant. Jeffrey D. Smith Principal Product Architect Farsight Systems Corporation 700 KEN PRATT BLVD. #204-159 LONGMONT, CO 80501-6452 303-774-9381 direct 303-484-6170 FAX http://www.farsight-systems.com/ comments are invited on my encryption project ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
