On Nov 1, 2007, at 6:56 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
LE-independent, I see. Would it likewise be independent of
Run Time Library license encumbrances, so ISVs could distribute
compiled code to customers without the compiler licensed, and
free of prelinker entanglements so the full facility of SMP/E
maintenance with fine granularity could be exploited?
Thanks,
gil
Paul,
As you probably know I am NOT an LE fan. That being said, I would
think it would be close to impossible to come up with a "subroutine"
library that could be common across all the products that you would
envision. Trying to maintain something that is OS release independent
and language independent. Especially if you envision this to be cross
vendor as it is POSITIVELY will come up, that it will work with one
release of a vendors product and not with another's release. The
complications of trying to do so would, IMO would be close to
impossible. IBM can't do it themselves with LE what makes you think
when you add other vendors it could be done?
IBM did a half way credible job with the old cobol subroutine library
it really did work across many versions of MVS without any issue I
ever heard of. The PC weenies thought they could do it with LE and
they fell flat on their faces.
Perhaps if it did not call on any system services it would be
possible but then there are some services are so tightly ingrained
that anything changed would create versioning issues, UGH!
Ed
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
