On 28 Oct 2006 11:42:59 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote: >====== Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) ====== wrote 2006-10-25 23:46: >> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 10/23/2006 >> at 06:02 PM, Thomas Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >> >>> I think it's funny that this thread that started >>>from details in teaching basic assembler to newbies >>> has evolved into an interactive lesson in very advanced >>> assembler. >> >> Except that there is disagreement as to what is basic and what is >> advanced. >> > >Yes. But now that I think of it; the "antithesis" of basic is probably >not "advanced" but rather something like "extended". And the antithesis >of advanced is probably "simple" or maybe "primitive". > >Either way, I think that our disagreement lies in that I see the >smallest/lowest degree of "basic" is the assembler code and machine dito. >And that this is best level to start from if You want that the maximum >number of students to be able to continue the course and sill be able to >understand what they are doing.
Whether it is advanced or simple, for a batch program, it just isn't worth the bother to code the program in a reentrant manner. If IBM had made the ACB the control block for ALL access methods and frozen the DCB, I might change my mind. Sub-routines and exits are a different story although I would look for ways to avoid the storage macro and GETMAIN/FREEMAIN from an overhead point of view. > >Thomas Berg ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
