Peter
Let's look at it this way: the macro is a solid way development uses in
order to document the interface precisely - because it has to work in all
its guises. It is then up to the programmer whether the macro is used or raw
code.
It's also up to the programmer's conscience how well he/she documents the
raw code - but that applies just about as much when using the macros.
Incidentally, by definition, if you've go it 100% correct you are
*definitely* "fine".
Finally let us remember that this whole thread is about understanding the
interface supposedly covered by the use of macros and how there is even a
trap here if the significance of the generated code is not fully grasped.
Chris Mason
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Relson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 12:19 PM
Subject: Re: Need help with Assembler accessing VSAM file in reentrant
LE-conforming program
>If IBM is committed to ensuring that the program will works from this
point
on for evermore, how can the routines called by the SVC "know" whether or
not the SVC was assembled from programmer code[1] or macro code? Release
x+n
cannot change what release x's macro created! What's all this nonsense
about
"all bets are off"!?!
If you got it 100% right, you're likely fine. If you got it 1% wrong, then
don't make any presumptions.
You're surely right that the routines cannot tell. But it remains a fact
that the interface is the macro.
Peter Relson
z/OS Core Technology Design
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
