Lack of an SDWA will not cause an ESTAE to be bypassed.
You should certainly consider using the long-recommended ESTAEX instead or
at least (if running on which release this was introduced) specify
SDWALOC31=YES, if your program can handle an SDWA above 16M. Having the
SDWA be gettable above 16M
/frr/sdwa ?
Hello: I have an ESTAE coded, but discovered it isn't doing its job
correctly. (It is essentially being bypassed.)
So, 1) from a dump, is it possible to tell if an SDWA was being passed to
the ESTAE routine? and 2) is it possible to tell if an FRR got control
instead of my ESTAE
IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu wrote on 02/07/2009
11:21:12 AM:
Make sure you don't have and SLIPs coded for the abend condition
you're testing that have instructions to bypass the (E)STAE processing.
I was testing a change to one of our (E)STAE routines and kept
: Re: estae/frr/sdwa ?
IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu wrote on 02/07/2009
11:21:12 AM:
Make sure you don't have and SLIPs coded for the abend condition
you're testing that have instructions to bypass the (E)STAE processing.
I was testing a change to one of our (E)STAE
Hello: I have an ESTAE coded, but discovered it isn't doing its job
correctly. (It is essentially being bypassed.)
So, 1) from a dump, is it possible to tell if an SDWA was being passed to
the ESTAE routine? and 2) is it possible to tell if an FRR got control
instead of my ESTAE?
(During
Paul Schuster wrote:
Hello: I have an ESTAE coded, but discovered it isn't doing its job
correctly. (It is essentially being bypassed.)
So, 1) from a dump, is it possible to tell if an SDWA was being passed to
the ESTAE routine? and 2) is it possible to tell if an FRR got control
instead of
6 matches
Mail list logo
