You have our blessing. Go forth and LOAD. ;-) . . JO.Skip Robinson Southern California Edison Company Electric Dragon Team Paddler SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager 626-302-7535 Office 323-715-0595 Mobile jo.skip.robin...@sce.com
From: Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU, Date: 03/06/2013 03:32 PM Subject: Reality check on LOAD + Rexx LINKPGM Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> I have a Rexx program (bigger than a "script") that is going to call a module whose name will come from a customer-specified parameter file. As I have it coded now the Rexx first calls a little assembler stub that I happened to already have that issues an MVS LOAD. I then use Rexx ADDRESS LINKPGM to call the module. LINKPGM makes the LOAD technically redundant, but I like the explicit LOAD because the return codes from my assembler LOAD are waaaaay better than the return code from LINKPGM, For example: Error loading XXXXXXXX: ABEND Code S806 Reason Code 4 versus +++ RC(-3) +++ My reading of Assembler Services indicates that there is little additional overhead in doing things this way, that is. with an explicit LOAD followed by a LINKPGM: "A module is considered usable for ATTACH, LINK, or XCTL if it has not been marked NOT REUSABLE by a previous ATTACH, LINK, or XCTL." (FWIW, the loaded module might or might not be RENT/REUS/authorized etc.) Would the august sages of IBMMAIN agree that this is not a bad way to do things; that there is little additional overhead in using LOAD + LINKPGM (+ DELETE) as opposed to just LINKPGM? Thanks, Charles ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
