On Mon, 16 Mar 2015 10:03:42 -0500, Walt Farrell wrote:

>Using fork() is not a problem, John, and has long been recommended as one 
>separation mechanism that would allow safer mixing of APF and non-APF programs.
>
>The DDs will be the big problem, especially (as in Charles's case) where he's 
>invoking a program he does not control. That program will expect the DDs to be 
>allocated locally, and will expect to use typical MVS I/O macros to access 
>them.
> 
> ...
BX1EXM is no better; it's just a variant of fork().  Would PC be a more
manageable robust approach?

Of course, I don't expect to see traditional facilities (SMP/E) soon embrace
PC.  SMOP.

-- gil

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to