Page 1 of 1
While compiling, RENT on IGYCRCTL versus HEWL.
Posted: Mon Mar 11, 2019 1:08 pm
by durga
Hi,
We had been using a home grown CLIST to compile the COBOL programs of all sort. Now we have a new SCM tool coming in. we want to make sure that the compile JCL created by the CLIST and the new tool are same.
While testing I found out that for a batch COBOL program these were the options:
CLIST:
IGYCRCTL: NOOPT,DATA(31),RENT
HEWL: LIST, LET, MAP, XREF, AMODE=31, RMODE=ANY, CALL
Tool:
IGYCRCTL: NOOPT,DATA(31)
HEWL: LIST, LET, MAP, XREF, AMODE=31, RMODE=ANY, RENT
Noe, RENT is at IGYCRCTL in CLIST while in tool it is at HEWL (link/binder), will this make a difference?
I looked at these documents:
https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgece ... up0057.htm
https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgece ... cllexx.htm
but still trying to confirm it. If someone can guide on this, that would be great.
Re: While compiling, RENT on IGYCRCTL versus HEWL.
Posted: Mon Mar 11, 2019 6:50 pm
by Robert Sample
Noe, RENT is at IGYCRCTL in CLIST while in tool it is at HEWL (link/binder), will this make a difference?
It can make a difference. Whether or not it actually does, though, is a different question. If the default compile option is RENT, then the tool not specifying it would not matter. If the default compile option is NORENT, though, then the COBOL compiler will NOT generate a reentrant object module and that would impact the linkage editor / binder since it would not be able to create a reentrant load module from nonreentrant object modules.
Your best bet would be to work with your site support group on the issue and find out what they have the compiler defaults set to. The default is RENT, but that can be changed by site options.
Re: While compiling, RENT on IGYCRCTL versus HEWL.
Posted: Mon Mar 11, 2019 7:29 pm
by enrico-sorichetti
there is no relation whatsoever between the compiler and binder RENT parm
for cobol it will make a difference in the machine code being generated,
for assembler
RENT
Specifies that the assembler checks for possible coding violations of program reenterability. Non-reenterable code is identified by an error message, but is not exhaustively checked because the assembler cannot check the logic of the code. Therefore, the assembler might not detect all violations of program reenterability.
IIRC the linkage editor / binder will just apply the requested attributes
it does not have any way to determine if the thing being bound is really reentrant or not
( at least for assembler )
all will be painfully discovered at run time
Re: While compiling, RENT on IGYCRCTL versus HEWL.
Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:21 pm
by durga
I was working with the team involved in setting up the tool. They told me if the options shown the in the COBOL listing from CLIST and TOOL are same, we are good. As shown below:
Is that correct, even when the we have difference in the JCLs generated as stated in the first post?
Code: Select all
PP 5655-S71 IBM ENTERPRISE COBOL FOR Z/OS 4.2.0
INVOCATION PARAMETERS:
NOOPT,DATA(31),RENT,
OPTIONS IN EFFECT:
NOADATA
NOADV
APOST
ARITH(COMPAT)
NOAWO
NOBLOCK0
BUFSIZE(16384)
NOCICS
CODEPAGE(1140)
NOCOMPILE(E)
NOCURRENCY
DATA(31)
NODATEPROC
NODBCS
NODECK
DIAGTRUNC
NODLL
NODUMP
NODYNAM
NOEXIT
NOEXPORTALL
FASTSRT
FLAG(W,E)
FLAGMIG4
NOFLAGSTD
INTDATE(ANSI)
LANGUAGE(UE)
LIB
LINECOUNT(60)
LIST
MAP
NOMDECK
NONAME
NSYMBOL(DBCS)
NONUMBER
NUMPROC(NOPFD)
OBJECT
NOOFFSET
NOOPTIMIZE
OUTDD(SYSOUT)
PGMNAME(COMPAT)
RENT
RMODE(AUTO)
NOSEQUENCE
SIZE(MAX)
SOURCE
SPACE(1)
NOSQL
SQLCCSID
NOSSRANGE
NOTERM
NOTEST
NOTHREAD
TRUNC(BIN)
PP 5655-S71 IBM ENTERPRISE COBOL FOR Z/OS 4.2.0
NOVBREF
NOWORD
XMLPARSE(XMLSS)
XREF(FULL)
YEARWINDOW(1900)
ZWB
PP 5655-S71 IBM ENTERPRISE COBOL FOR Z/OS 4.2.0
Re: While compiling, RENT on IGYCRCTL versus HEWL.
Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2019 3:47 pm
by nicc
What you posted is from the compiler so how the options weere set is irrelevant as long as they are correct. The same goes for the binder.
Re: While compiling, RENT on IGYCRCTL versus HEWL.
Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2019 3:50 pm
by durga
I am sorry but I did not get you. You mean if the options appear in the above list, irrespective of the point whether they were supplied at compiler or binder does not matter?
Re: While compiling, RENT on IGYCRCTL versus HEWL.
Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2019 4:34 pm
by enrico-sorichetti
irrespective of the point whether they were supplied at compiler or binder does not matter
where and how the options/parms are specified/provided DO matter
the compiler does not know about the binder and the binder does not know about the compiler
the compiler does not care about the binder options/parms
the binder does not care about the compiler options/parms
Re: While compiling, RENT on IGYCRCTL versus HEWL.
Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 10:53 pm
by Anuj Dhawan
It'd be a good idea to test the executable, after both the compilation, to verify if all works well.