On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 23:45:21 +0000, Seymour J Metz wrote: >No, > ??? "No" to which of my questions/conjectures.
We were novices except for our mentor who was heavily committed otherwise, and the intellectual overhead of mastering NOTE/POINT and remembering the offset in the block outweighed the computational overhead. I suppose we could kept and reused open DCBs to the highwater mark of nested includes (usually just 1), but we didn't do even that. >and if there's only on DD it's more overhead to do multiple OPEN compared to >multiple FINDs. ________________________________________ From: Paul Gilmartin Sent: Sunday, March 29, 2020 5:45 PM On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 21:01:51 +0000, Seymour J Metz wrote: >Does SAS/C actually open as BPAM and use point, or does it just stuff the >member name in the JFCB and use BSAM/QSAM? > Does it work to "just stuff the member name in the JFCB and use BSAM/QSAM" if the DDNAME refers to a concatenation? Is the advantage of the "stuff" technique that QSAM handles blocking, BPAM does not? I suspect that many languages support BPAM at translation time; fewer at execution time. In a FOSS Pascal processor I was associated with, we used BPAM, at both compilation and execution time. We eschewed NOTE/POINT for nested INCLUDE members and simply opened additional DCBs on the same DDNAME. (This wasn't your 32K 360/20). Worked fine on MVS; failed miserably on CMS. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
