On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 2:14 PM, Kirk Wolf <[email protected]> wrote:
> Sam,
>
> This is a really good suggestion.... I have used fetch() from non-XPLINK C
> before to call XPLINK C in a separate enclave, so I know that that works.
> It may be more COBOL than I can handle, though... :-)
>
> Kirk Wolf
> Dovetailed Technologies
> http://dovetail.com
>
That was an interesting idea. I don't know the calling sequence for
the program you are wanting to run, but I would think that something
modeled the following would work:
77 COZBATCH USAGE IS FUNCTION-POINTER.
77 COZBATCH-NAME PICTURE Z(9) VALUE IS 'COZBATCH'.
01 COZBATCH-PARM.
05 COZBATCH-PARM-LENGTH PIC S9(4) BINARY VALUE IS +0.
05 COZBATCH-PARM PIC X.
CALL 'FETCH' USING COZBATCH-NAME RETURNING COZBATCH.
CALL COZBATCH USING COZBATCH-PARM
I used FUNCTION-POINTER instead of PROCEDURE-POINTER due to:
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/igy3lr31/5.3.17.4
<quote>
A function-pointer is a 4-byte elementary item. Function-pointers have
the same capabilities as procedure-pointers, but are 4 bytes in length
instead of 8 bytes. Function-pointers are thus more easily
interoperable with C function pointers.
</quote>
--
There is nothing more pleasant than traveling and meeting new people!
Genghis Khan
Maranatha! <><
John McKown
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
