OK, I totally missed your point. Sorry about that. Going back to gil's post, I agree (with Tom) that SVC 99 has no business getting into the parsing business. It's a well-defined interface.
I see no reason why various different "languages" shouldn't be used to express the functionality. No one would seriously say that all programming should be done in say, C. Ha, now that I read that back, I'd bet that's disputable. sas On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 9:00 PM Tom Marchant < 0000000a2a8c2020-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > Where did I get the idea that SVC 99 code runs in Supervisor state? > It is an SVC. > SVC code receives control in Supervisor state. > It doesn't require that the program issuing the SVC 99 have any privileges > > -- > Tom Marchant. > > On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 20:27:27 -0400, Steve Smith <sasd...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >Let me be the first of likely many who will say "where did you get that > >idea?" It doesn't require any more privilege than ALLOC or bpxwdyn. Or > >// DD. > > > >sas > > > >On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 7:47 PM Tom Marchant < > >0000000a2a8c2020-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > > > >> On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 14:32:18 -0500, Paul Gilmartin < > paulgboul...@aol.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >> >The parsing and interpretation should be done by SVC 99, not in > >> >code replicated and maintained in the various utilities/ > >> > >> I disagree. SVC 99 is a Supervisor state function. > >> Parsing and interpretation is a function that does not require running > in > >> Supervisor state or any other privileged mode. It should be done by > Problem > >> state code. > >> > >> -- > >> Tom Marchant > >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
