EDCDSECT, sometimes called just CDSECT, a part of the XLC compiler, does a very adequate job of converting assembler DSECTs, including from z/OS macros, to C headers. Are they pretty? No. Do they "make sense"? Oftentimes not. Are they ideal? No. But they are syntactically correct and 99% of the time the storage layout is correct, and they do the job.
Charles -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of Ze'ev Atlas Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2018 3:16 PM To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: Re: New Metal C standalone product for z/OS Actually, I would say it is the other way around. It is relatively easy to create a set of structurea that resemble the control blocks and traverse around, providing that IBM create the appropriate header files and maintain them (most of us are capable of translating the macros to C headers, but maintence would be a nigtmare.)OTH, I won't be comfortable relying on some home grown assembler code. I think that if IBM true to the stated goal they should supply a small set of key liw level system callsZA Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 1:27 PM, Paul Gilmartin<00000014e0e4a59b-dmarc-requ...@listserv.uga.edu> wrote: On 2018-07-17, at 10:45:20, John McKown wrote: > > http://www-01.ibm.com/common/ssi/ShowDoc.wss?docURL=/common/ssi/rep_ca/6/897/ENUS218-326/index.html⟨=en&request_locale=en > ... > Enterprise Metal C for z/OS is the newest, stand-alone offering for the IBM > family of development tools. Enterprise Metal C for z/OS delivers a > high-level language alternative to having to write programs in High Level > Assembler (HLASM). The ability to write programs in HLASM is a specialized > skill for the z/OS platform and developers with expertise in assembler > skills are difficult to find. Developers can use C syntax instead to > develop systems programs. This eliminates the need to manage the use of > registers and to manually tune assembler instruction sequences. Enterprise > Metal C for z/OS does this for developers. > What about availability of equivalent of macros for SVC and PC interfaces and control block mapping? Embedded assembler code might suffice for SVC and PC; it's less comfortable to rely on embedded assembler to access control block fields. IBM made a serious mistake in not making PL/S a product a half-century ago. -- gil
