Obviously something has to be altered. What it is depends on the situation but some appropriate data structure will be modified which naturally has to be done correctly. Incorrect updates will cause problems whether to control blocks or code. The benefit of our wrapper intercept is that code in non-modifiable storage (such as page protected) can still be intercepted and control redirected if needed. The Trap is located in our code rather than in the code being intercepted. As I said before a debugging system is a powerful tool and its use must be restricted to an appropriate machine.
Chuck Arney On Apr 10, 2013, at 3:47 PM, Andy Wood <woo...@ozemail.com.au> wrote: > On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 09:06:13 -0500, Kenneth Wilkerson <redb...@austin.rr.com> > wrote: > >> TDF does not use traditional "intercept" technology. TDF never alters any >> user code other than user specified breakpoints and it never alters any MVS >> code in any way. > > What about pointers to MVS code? Updating those is what I would call the > traditional method, rather than dynamically altering a couple of instructions > here or there (yes I have seen that too, when it went spectacularly wrong, > but it is not very common). > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
