On Mon, 14 Jan 2013 11:46:03 -0800, Skip Robinson wrote: >I've never used BPXWDYN, but I do know that the ancient practice of >FREEing a file that is not currently allocated educes a message to that >effect. On the other hand, ALLOCATing with REUSE works 'cleanly' whether >or not the file is already allocated. ... > False for TSO ALLOCATE.
> ... I assume that BPXWDYN honors REUSE... > In fact, BPXWDYN extends the semantic of REUSE to free the DDNAME if necessary. In that respect it's better than TSO ALLOCATE. I've never understood the whole subject of reusing allocations, and marking allocations eligible for reuse. Is there some horrendous overhead this avoids? was this true only historically, or does it remain a concern nowadays? -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
