On 19/03/2013 9:27 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 21:08:03 +0800, David Crayford wrote:
On 19/03/2013 9:01 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 06:49:00 -0500, Tom Marchant wrote:
I'm just curious. Why do you need to ATTACH the program
if it is not to run asynchronously?
Doesn't task termination automatically free some resources that
the programmer would need to free specifically after a LINK?
Also if the attached program abends it doesn't sink the entire ship.
I suspect that can be covered with an ESTAE in either case. But it's
easier with ATTACH.
It's certainly easier when you don't *own* the attached program, which
is usually when I've seen this technique used.
-- gil
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
