On Wed, 4 May 2022 13:28:29 -0700, Charles Mills wrote: >. ... >It appears that depending on the order that PTFs were applied, the CSECTs >are in a different order in the load module, and so two programs that are >utterly functionally equivalent would have different checksums. > I had one co-worker who (compulsively?) supplied ORDER statements for all his CSECTs, eliminating uncontrolled variables. This became increasingly challenging with modern compilers emitting a collection of sections difficult to predict. IIRC, wrote a utility to enumerate the CSECTs from a SYSPRINT.
And I persuaded another co-worker to eschew PC sections which SMP/E accumulates in a secular fashion. >You know what would be an interesting product? A program that would take a >load module, "decompose" it into its constituent CSECTs, ... > ... >(Yes, you can hypothesize a program where CSECT order made a difference, but >it sounds unusual to me.) > Some programmers bracket their modules with trivial sections in order to calculate their total size. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
