The one reason I know of what a PDSE is required is because TEST/DEBUG information is now stored in a DWARF NOLOAD segment, and those are only supported by PDSE (or UNIX directory).
> Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2016 14:55:31 -0800 > From: charl...@mcn.org > Subject: Re: COBOL v5 > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > > If by "requires" you mean in some absolute fundamental logical/technical > sense, you may well be right. This might be a "marketing" restriction for > all any of us knows. > > OTOH I can assure you it requires a PDSE in the sense that if you compile a > program using COBOL 5.2 and attempt to bind the resulting object code into > an executable, the binder will fail if SYSLMOD references a PDS -- so in > that sense I assure you that COBOL 5.2 "requires" a PDSE. > > Charles > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On > Behalf Of Ed Gould > Sent: Saturday, January 23, 2016 1:54 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: COBOL v5 > > > I would argue the word "requires" I suspect (and cannot prove) that COBOL 5 > can work perfectly fine without a PDSE. > I would be happy to be proven wrong. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
