🚀 go-pugleaf

Following my earlier question (on comp.lang.rexx - thanks for answers
especially the corrections to my wrong example!) I asked ibm about the
implementation of DROP in their mvs (tso, netview etc) rexx
implementation.  They said that (as the manual says) DROP merely
unassigns and there is no predicted freeing of virtual storage (you
certainly can't rely on it).  They didn't give any hints that (even)
suggested any way of a programmer exercising control over the way that
v.s. is used or freed after use.  

I assume that space used at one stage of a rexx program might be reused
later in the same program if vars had been dropped ... but even that's a
guess.  

Does anyone actually know how variables are stored (in mvs etc rexx) and
whether there's scope for freemaining the v.s.?   As vars that are not
exposed in a procedure are local to it, are they held in a 'stacked' v.s.
manner thus allowing disposal of them after one call of a procedure? 
Again, even if they are dropped is there any point - perhaps when the
address space's v.s. usage is high that garbage collection/compaction of
the variables' storage might occur?

-- 
Jeremy C B Nicoll - my opinions are my own.