In
<cae1xxdg+wpq27ohberb7yrwtkp4ehr3tsxkjrwifkgmqn6y...@mail.gmail.com>,
on 10/12/2013
at 08:42 AM, John Gilmore <[email protected]> said:
>A load-module image is not simply relocated in memory with ADCONs
>appropriately incremented. Very complex processing of a mixture
>of text and control information is performed.
Nonsense; the only real complexity is in scatter load. The complexity
in fetch is due to attempts to improve performance.
>and neither BSAM nor QSAM can make any
>sense of either a load-module PDS member
BSAM and QSAM read load modules just fine, TYVM. I've been using them
for decades.
>but it is not really very responsive.
I notice that you didn't provide any details either, presumably for
the same reason; you would have had to include a lot of background
that would have been TMI.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
