On Fri, 30 Apr 2021 07:17:29 +0800, David Crayford <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 30/04/2021 4:30 am, Charles Mills wrote: >> Hmmm. I shared David's impression but >> http://publibfp.dhe.ibm.com/epubs/pdf/i1357010.pdf lists LE as a "Target >> System Mandatory Operational Requisite." > >The xlclang++ compiler is IBMs fork of LLVM which uses the clang front >end to produce intermediate code for the TOBY back-end. That is part of >the XL C/C++ compiler and relies on LE. > >This is different. If you read the link again IBM clearly state they are >porting the open source LLVM/Clang with the libc++ runtime. This is not >LE. You can see that IBM are already commiting changes >to LLVM. This is open source stuff >https://reviews.llvm.org/rGcb2d2ae56ae3f0554c40c2d7f231ca5058e4d50c > > >> Charles >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On >> Behalf Of Linda Chui >> Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2021 12:11 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: Meta languages [was: RE: Assembler Language Programming for IBM >> System z Servers] >> >> On Thu, 8 Apr 2021 18:27:06 +0800, David Crayford <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> On 6/04/2021 9:53 pm, Charles Mills wrote: >>>>> You don't use templates >>>> I certainly do use templates. Not sure how you get "don't use templates" >>>> from what I wrote. Heck, I *over* used templates in the first large C++ >>>> project I ever did, and boy, does that make a mess! Now I think I am down >>>> to a happy medium. I don't see them as "competitive" (in a design sense) >>>> with macros. >>> Overusing as in template meta-programming? >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_metaprogramming >>> >>> The XL C++ compiler is withering on the vine. The word is that IBM don't >>> the resources to keep it up to date with the current standards so the >>> xlclang++ port of clang using the existing Toby back-end is the way to >>> go. If you use PDS data sets for your source your SOL as it's z/OS UNIX >>> only and only produces 64-bit modules. >>> >>> But what I find exciting is that IBM have stated their intentions to >>> fully port LLVM/clang/libc[++] to z/OS without a reliance on LE so >>> supervisor state programming in C++ will be a reality without the >>> nightmare of LE ESPIE/ESTAE condition handlers. >>> >>> https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-June/142174.html >>> >>> >>>> Charles >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On >>>> Behalf Of David Crayford >>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 6, 2021 5:15 AM >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Subject: Re: Meta languages [was: RE: Assembler Language Programming for >>>> IBM System z Servers] >>>> >>>> On 6/04/2021 1:23 am, Charles Mills wrote: >>>>>> But IMHO none easy to learn or use. >>>>> I am generally not a fan of meta languages at all. I think writing >>>>> programs is hard enough, without having to write two effective programs: >>>>> one that runs at compile time and one that runs at run time. >>>>> >>>>> In my C++, which is now my primary language, I eschew the use of C macros >>>>> as much as reasonably possible. Reasonableness is a key here. For a few >>>>> things, macros make sense. >>>> That's interesting. You don't use templates which are one the most >>>> powerful features of C++? >>>> >> >> Well, I didn't see a reference to LE in our statement of direction at >> https://community.ibm.com/community/user/ibmz-and-linuxone/blogs/robert-barrington1/2020/08/04/ibm-cc-and-fortran-compilers-to-adopt-llvm >> >> I believe the compiler will require LE for the foreseeable future, though if >> you want to request an LE free mode, I’m sure you can put in a request for >> it at the RFE site https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rfe/ >> >> Hope this helps. >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN (apologies for late response . I missed seeing the follow on posts :-( Again, from our dev team: libc++ under the covers still uses the C runtime, which is still LE. As an aside, we are shipping libc++ under LE as well so even if there was no C dependency, there would still be an LE dependency. Hope this helps. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
