To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Date: 2017/08/21 06:51
> Subject: Re: MSGIEW2678S Module contains one or more deferred classes
> Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
>
> A closing note: The binder has four entry
> points: IEWBLINK, IEWBLOAD, IEWBLODI (the one
> I had trouble
A closing note: The binder has four entry points: IEWBLINK, IEWBLOAD, IEWBLODI
(the one
I had trouble with), and IEWBLDGO.
Of these four, only IEWBLINK binds into a program library. The other
three do perform in-core binding.
Yet, the "z/OS V2R2 MVS Program Management: Advanced Facilities"
On Fri, 11 Aug 2017 15:59:08 -0700, Tom Ross
wrote:
>
>>Everyone talks about WSOPT vs NOWSOPT compiler option, but I can't find the=
>>m documented in COBOL documentation library.
>>Are WSOPT and NOWSOPT some nicknames of the accurate terms?
>>Where are they documented?
>
>Everyone? No one sho
Frank Swarbrick wrote:
Now imagine that the DLL gets loaded repeatedly and in each case only one of
the programs it contains is actually executed. That case could have
performance problems in the C world because the static data for all of the few
thousand independent programs is created and i
Sounds like someone ought to fix that! ;)
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Allan Kielstra
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 5:30 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: MSGIEW2678S Module contains one or more deferred classes
Yes a C DLL does
Yes a C DLL does have all static variables allocated and initialized when a DLL
is loaded. This is usually fine. However suppose you had a few thousand
independent programs that you linked into a DLL simply for packaging purposes.
And suppose that each program had a lot of static storage asso
to COBOL, because C programs use far fewer static
variables than COBOL programs using working-storage fields?
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Tom
Ross
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 4:59 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: MSGIEW2678S Mo
>On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 22:18:51 +, Frank Swarbrick .COM> wrote:
>
>>There was a post to ibm-main by Allan Kielstra of IBM compiler development=
> (I think) on May 10, 2017 (How are Program Object sections with Defer attr=
>ibute loaded?) that discusses how the writable static area (WSA) is used in
when I said "nowhere known to IEWBLODI for the deferred classes to be
loaded from", I was thinking that IEWBLODI takes input from
, and builds an executable in storage.
Tony,
I think of it that the binder has everything, just as it would when saving
the executable to a data set.
The deferred s
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 22:18:51 +, Frank Swarbrick
wrote:
>
>There was a post to ibm-main by Allan Kielstra of IBM compiler development (I
>think) on May 10, 2017 (How are Program Object sections with Defer attribute
>loaded?) that discusses how the writable static area (WSA) is used in COBOL
12:29 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: MSGIEW2678S Module contains one or more deferred classes
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 22:18:51 +, Frank Swarbrick
wrote:
>There was a post to ibm-main by Allan Kielstra of IBM compiler development (I
>think) on May 10, 2017 (How are Program Object se
On 10 August 2017 at 08:05, Peter Relson wrote:
>
> And the resulting IEW2678S makes sense in that context, because there
> is nowhere known to IEWBLODI for the deferred classes to be loaded
> from. So asking IBM to support deferred classes in IEWBLODI (or
> IEWBLOAD, which is the same thing exce
On Thu, 10 Aug 2017 08:05:04 -0400, Peter Relson wrote:
>
>I'd have actually said that there is nowhere known to IEWBLODI for the
>deferred classes to be
>loaded *to* (rather than *from*). It is LE that needs the instantiation of
>the C_WSA deferred class.
>And LE might need more than one of th
And the resulting IEW2678S makes sense in that context, because there
is nowhere known to IEWBLODI for the deferred classes to be loaded
from. So asking IBM to support deferred classes in IEWBLODI (or
IEWBLOAD, which is the same thing except without the IDENTIFY), makes
little sense. What might ma
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 22:18:51 +, Frank Swarbrick
wrote:
>There was a post to ibm-main by Allan Kielstra of IBM compiler development (I
>think) on May 10, 2017 (How are Program Object sections with Defer attribute
>loaded?) that discusses how the writable static area (WSA) is used in COBOL V5
SA.
Hopefully I got that all right!
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Wednesday, August 9, 2017 1:47 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: MSGIEW2678S Module contains one or more deferred classes
I also see this
Ross could explain that part to us.
Peter
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2017 3:33 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: MSGIEW2678S Module contains one or more
that eliminates all deferred classes though.
HTH
Pe6ter
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Giliad Wilf
Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2017 2:36 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: MSGIEW2678S Module contains one or
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 13:37:54 -0400, Tony Harminc wrote:
>
>And the resulting IEW2678S makes sense in that context, because there
>is nowhere known to IEWBLODI for the deferred classes to be loaded
>from. So asking IBM to support deferred classes in IEWBLODI (or
>IEWBLOAD, which is the same thing e
On 9 August 2017 at 12:34, Binyamin Dissen wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 08:10:53 -0500 Giliad Wilf wrote:
> :>You got it right.
> :>I need to further analyze the source to find out what else was IEWBLODI
> supposed to do there.
>
> It builds the module in memory without requiring it to be hardene
On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 11:34 AM, Binyamin Dissen wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 08:10:53 -0500 Giliad Wilf
> <00d50942efa9-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>
> :>On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 06:41:04 -0500, John McKown <
> john.archie.mck...@gmail.com> wrote:
> :>
> :>>I'm probably not really underst
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 08:10:53 -0500 Giliad Wilf
<00d50942efa9-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
:>On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 06:41:04 -0500, John McKown
wrote:
:>
:>>I'm probably not really understanding what you want to do. So I'll give a
:>>try at an alternate explanation for what I _think_ you
[Default] On 9 Aug 2017 06:09:42 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
00d50942efa9-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu (Giliad Wilf) wrote:
>On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 06:41:04 -0500, John McKown
>wrote:
>
>>I'm probably not really understanding what you want to do. So I'll give a
>>try at an alternate explana
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 06:41:04 -0500, John McKown
wrote:
>I'm probably not really understanding what you want to do. So I'll give a
>try at an alternate explanation for what I _think_ you want. You have a
>"test" version of a program, call it TESTPGM, in your production PDSE. This
>is a test versio
I'm probably not really understanding what you want to do. So I'll give a
try at an alternate explanation for what I _think_ you want. You have a
"test" version of a program, call it TESTPGM, in your production PDSE. This
is a test version of PRODPGM in the same PDSE. You have another program,
MAIN
25 matches
Mail list logo
