On Thu, 1 Nov 2007 19:42:18 -0500, Ed Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>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? Huh? Your "subroutine library" is the same set of system services provided for assembler programs (Metal C provides for the programmed assignment of registers and 'dropping down' to assembler in-line with your C program. Ergo, the versioning issues are no different than what you have with your assembler routines. Scott Fagen Enterprise Systems Management ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
