If you realy want them- link them...
Am 05.12.23 um 16:14 schrieb Dave Clark:
"IBM Mainframe Assembler List" wrote on
12/04/2023 04:11:18 PM:
I suggest you use the DYNAMIC call of IEANTxx the deal with tokens.
Directly from the CVT or using LOAD and BASR
Can't use a dynamic call bec
Tony,
assuming that you ment "not keeping the needed ESD-record":
yes exactly in that order and I am not sure about item no 3 - If Axel
would be still around- he could say so
Martin
Am 05.12.23 um 14:35 schrieb Tony Thigpen:
Martin,
I wonder if this can be easily changed? (Not keeping t
And regrettable that ORDER won't work for sections in different classes, even
if those classes will end up in the same segment.
I opened an RFE on this but it was declined.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List On Behalf
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Monday, December 4, 2023
"IBM Mainframe Assembler List" wrote on
12/04/2023 04:11:18 PM:
> I suggest you use the DYNAMIC call of IEANTxx the deal with tokens.
> Directly from the CVT or using LOAD and BASR
Can't use a dynamic call because IBM did not supply the load
module (in z/VSE) for these -- only the obje
I cannot imagine anyone being willing to implement an "RMODE MIN" whose only
purpose is to allow you to specify an RMODE statement multiple times in one
CSECT with different values.
Functionally, at the cost of 8 bytes (and it conceivably can be accomplished
with 0, but I have not tried), state
Martin,
I wonder if this can be easily changed? (Not keeping the needed RDL
records.)
I am thinking:
1) LNKEDT needs to keep the items.
2) LIBR PUNCH needs to punch the items.
3) The program loader needs to ignore the records.
I wonder if, due to long ago historical compatibility, that maybe
DOS/VS keeps a RLD (relocat dict)-items since a very long time. It was
there when I touched DOS/VS the first time in 73.
In fact when I worked for a service bureau with 15 datacenters (from
1975), we had just one installation that had no relocatable loader
(i.o.w. a more current version of DO
