On 28 Nov 2006 05:51:27 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
(Message-ID:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Marchant) wrote:
I'd say, it is simply *not* reentrant and has the RENT
bit set
incorrectly. Anyone can set the RENT bit on his module,
but that does
not mean it is coded reentrant, which apparently is also
true for this
code.
Kees.
You're right, Kees. "The module is reenterable. It can be
executed by more than one task at a time."
But, as described, the module may be LPA-eligible and
usable by multiple address spaces at the same time. It
just isn't useful to attempt using it by multiple tasks
within one address space at the same time. So, it is more
than serially reusable, and the RENT bit does give useful
information.
I was waiting for someone else to say it, but here's
adjectives I'd use to describe such code: "badly-written"
or "badly-designed". Or, am I missing a good reason
(unrelated to the hard-coded DDNAMEs) that FTP shouldn't be
used by multiple tasks within one address space?
--
I cannot receive mail at the address this was sent from.
To reply directly, send to ar23hur "at" intergate "dot" com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
