Thanks, Tony, SPC had in fact escaped my attention. I either never saw it, or ran it together with Metal C in my mind. (Yes, I am now clear on the difference.)
I think the Metal C looks like a better fit for what I am trying to do. No progress on this project today. Other fish jumping into the frying pan on April Fools' Day. Charles -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Tony Harminc Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 11:33 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Linking to MVS standard linkage function from Rexx On 1 April 2013 10:03, Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> wrote: > I am now thinking that perhaps I write the "SMF build" logic in the > Metal C subset dialect, but then compile it two ways: > > 1. With Metal C for linking with Rexx. > 2. With "standard" C (is there a name for non-metallic C? Plastic C?) > for linking with the C++ code. Probably "LE C" describes it best. But keep in mind that there's effectively a third kind of C: System Programming C. This is the same compiler (and same object output) as LE C, but with a different run-time environment that replaces (some of) LE with minimalist routines that provide basic services. And as with Metal C, there is no SPC++... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
