Tom, Thank you. I like Frank's idea also Scott ford www.identityforge.com from my IPAD
'Infinite wisdom through infinite means' On Sep 10, 2013, at 5:44 PM, Tom Ross <tmr...@stlvm20.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: >> Tom, >> >> Why convert to PDSE? I am curious? A stated IBM direction? > > Converting to PDSE just makes it easier to use or move to COBOL V5.1. > PDSE is far better than PDS, lots of advantages, so you could view it > as IBM direction, but for COBOL, that is the only thing we can do. > > In COBOL V5.1, we always generate parts of the object program with loadable > user classes, which are only supported by Program Objects. Load Modules > only support class B_TEXT or B_PRV in object programs. > > As Frank Swarbick suggested, it might be an option to use new PDSE Load > Libraries for newer code and add the new libraries to concatenations. > That would provide a one module at a time migration path, but it also might > add too much complexity to application build and maintenance. The good people > here on IBMMAIN would know much better than I would. Is that a reasonable > option, to just start using PDSEs from one day in the future for any programs > recompiled with COBOL V5.1? > > Cheers, > TomR >> COBOL is the Language of the Future! << > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
