Thank you, @David. I have been to the disclosure sessions and this is clearer than anything I have heard from IBM.
Question: what are the advantages and disadvantages of XL C/C++ 2.4.1 W/D versus Open XL C/C++? Why might I choose to use one versus the other? Thanks, Charles On Wed, 10 May 2023 10:36:02 +0800, David Crayford <[email protected]> wrote: >2.4.1 is more than a slight update, it’s a completely different front-end. To >make it more confusing there are three C/C++ compiler products on z/OS. > >XL C/C++ is the legacy compiler which supports 31/64-bit and has CICS >translation built it. It can run as a batch program. IBM have made no >statements of direction but it’s withering on the vine and does not support >the latest C/C++ standards. It’s almost impossible to use it for any modern >ports. >I can’t see this product ever disappearing as it’s required for the old school >JCL only shops. That’s not a dig at Peter, we have products that use PDS data >sets and are compiled using a legacy SCM product. I find it very difficult to >adapt when I work on these products after spending so long building >in a shell. > >XL C/C++ 2.4.1 Web Deliverable is a port of Clang which uses the existing >back-end. It’s better than the legacy compiler but it must run as a z/OS UNIX >executable. It supports more modern language standards such as C++14. > >Open XL C/C++ is a full on port of Clang. IBM are working with the open source >community. It’s interesting to read the code reviews which include devs from >Apple and Google. It’s my understanding that this compiler will replace 2.4.1 >some time in the future. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
