We don't have issues with interfacing XLC/C++ to OS services, after learning various ways to do things (intrinsics, inlining, assembler routines, stack sharing, EDCDSECT / IBM system headers, etc)
But if we have to redo a bunch of it for "Open XL C/C++" or if the PD isn't up to snuff then it's a hard pass. Kirk Wolf Dovetailed Technologies https://coztoolkit.com On Wed, Mar 19, 2025, at 12:45 PM, James Mulder wrote: > For compiler listings and actual assembler listings, and assembler inlines, > and for interfacing with > z/OS via its macro interfaces, PL/X has always had a huge advantage over > C/C++. > > In my opinion, it is very unfortunate for the z/OS ecosystem that IBM > executive management has never chosen to make > PL/X externally available. It has always been surprising to me that z/OS > customers and ISVs do not raise a big fuss with IBM about that. > > Jim Mulder > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On Behalf Of > Kirk Wolf > Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2025 12:47 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Open XL C dramaticallly slower thant z/OS XL C compiler - > expected? > > What about - > > - compiler listings like XLC/C++ (with pseudo assembly) > - Usable CEEDUMPs when there is an exception/abend > - assembler inlines > > Kirk Wolf > Dovetailed Technologies > https://coztoolkit.com > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2025, at 9:17 AM, JC Yao wrote: > > Open XL C/C++ is being delivered in stages with incremental enhancements. > > Open XL C/C++ 1.1 was bringing the Clang/LLVM infrastructure to the z/OS > > platform to support more recent C++ standards needed by many open-source > > applications coming onto the platform. Open XL C/C++ 2.1 added 32-bit code > > generation and z/OS batch support. > > We intend to keep improving the usability and features supported in the > > Open XL C/C++ compiler. You can expect usability improvement with debugging > > and additional key features from XL C/C++ in the next release of Open XL > > C/C++. > > > > On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 08:21:48 +0800, David Crayford <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > >Apologies, I fat fingered the previous email on my iPad. > > > > > >All our tests have been conducted from a z/OS UNIX shell, which has a > > >maximum region size. Using precompiled headers won’t make much difference > > >since most of the header files being read are part of the runtime and are > > >not precompiled. The XLC compiler used to include precompiled header > > >files, but IBM dropped them, stating they intended to improve compiler > > >performance, making them unnecessary. > > > > > >It gets worse. The new compiler does not generate compiler listings. > > >Neither does Clang, but at least it provides the llvm-objdump utility, > > >which, when used with debug files, can produce something useful for > > >debugging. Unfortunately, that tool isn’t included in the z/OS toolchain, > > >so god knows how a customer is supposed to support their code in the field. > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
