John McKown writes:
Do DXD and CXD work for communications between modules which are
dynamically LOADed or LINKed to? I think that they only work for modules
which are composite linked (bound?). Like FORTRAN Named Common.
Although the mechanism used is not like FORTRAN named common and its C and
PL/I analogues, the linkage editor in the past and now the binder play a
crucial role. CXD is in fact a request to the binder tpo place the
cumulative pseudoregister, externsal dummy section, length in a specified
location. Moreover, just as PL/I controlled variables can have either
scope, internal or external, it is possible to limnit access to this storage
to a single callable routine, which CAN make addresses available to other
dynamically loaded or linked-to routines.
None of this is for novices, but then neither are name/token services. My
point was that within a single perhaps multitasking or multithreaded context
DXD and CXD are very much more efficient.
John Gilmore
Ashland, MA 01721
USA
_________________________________________________________________
On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to
get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
