On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 11:16:13 -0400, John Gilmore wrote: > >There would certainly be no rationale for having AMODE(64) if there >were no above-the-bar virtual storage. Since, however, we do have >this storage there is sometimes a rationale for using AMODE(64) below >the bar, and the ability to invoke a facility from AMODE(64) code is >then also valuable. It reduces the need for mode switching and its >associated prologues and epilogues, if nothing else. > Having been through this (but not to successful completion) in the 370->XA transition when I had to obtain contol blocks below the line and add interface code below the line, and cursing IBM not for shirking the former (which is harder), but for shirking the latter (which is easier; they've done it at last), it was perhaps easy for me to intend more irony than you perceived.
It's still far from the level of compatibility of being able to code "EXEC PGM=ASMA90,PARM='64-bit,...' and being able to supply a 370 source program unmodified and letting conditional assembly handle the compatibility. The GET macro might test the AMODE and generate code to interface to either a DCB or a DCBE (or in the future a DCBG) as suitable. C comes rather close to this with its "#ifdef"s, but not entirely, as previous plies in this thread suggest. On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 20:12:58 -0500, John McKown wrote: >Most likely not of any use to you, but have you looked at GnuCOBOL? It >was OpenCOBOL, but has been taken over by GNU / FSF as one of their >languages. It works by translating COBOL to C and then compiling the C >code. If nothing else, it might give you some ideas. >http://sourceforge.net/projects/open-cobol/ . Of course, it does not >run on z/OS, ... > I thought that was only because you haven't finished porting it. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
