That *assumes* you use those facilities.
Ed
On Jan 25, 2016, at 11:00 AM, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
The one reason I know of what a PDSE is required is because TEST/
DEBUG information is now stored in a DWARF NOLOAD segment, and
those are only supported by PDSE (or UNIX directory).
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2016 14:55:31 -0800
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: COBOL v5
To: [email protected]
If by "requires" you mean in some absolute fundamental logical/
technical
sense, you may well be right. This might be a "marketing"
restriction for
all any of us knows.
OTOH I can assure you it requires a PDSE in the sense that if you
compile a
program using COBOL 5.2 and attempt to bind the resulting object
code into
an executable, the binder will fail if SYSLMOD references a PDS --
so in
that sense I assure you that COBOL 5.2 "requires" a PDSE.
Charles
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-
[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Ed Gould
Sent: Saturday, January 23, 2016 1:54 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: COBOL v5
I would argue the word "requires" I suspect (and cannot prove)
that COBOL 5
can work perfectly fine without a PDSE.
I would be happy to be proven wrong.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-
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
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
