The whole point of DYNAM is that you do NOT have to recompile calling programs when a subroutine is recompiled UNLESS the interface changes (E.G. if the arguments change format or order of position or new values are required, etc.).
The reason that CICS requires NODYNAM is that the CALL's that result from "EXEC CICS" statements have to be statically invoked and thus linked into the load module. Using "CALL variable-name" invokes dynamic calls regardless of the DYNAM/NODYNAM setting, even if the value of "variable name" is never changed. HTH Peter > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On > Behalf Of John Weber > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:48 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu > Subject: Re: CICS vs IMS > > I'm glad the DYNAM/NODYNAM has been brought up. I have a question about a > CICS application. It contains sub modules using CALL. > > PGM1 (CALL 'PGM2') --> PGM2 (CALL 'PGM3') --> PGM3 > > Each module is translated/pre-processed and then compiled with DYNAM. > > If PGM3 is compiled/linked, then PGM1 and PGM2 must be re-linked. Can > this be avoided? > > Thank you... -- This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your system. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
