On Mon, 13 Mar 2017 10:23:12 -0500, John McKown <[email protected]> 
wrote:

>​I took a quick look at XPLINK. And you're right, that's a whole 'nother
>kettle of fish. I basically understand the why, as explained in the LE
>manuals. But why COBOL decided to go with the same, other than
>inter-operation with C, is beyond my tiny (and shrinking) mind.​ Even with
>nested COBOL programs, I don't see COBOL programmers writing "tons" of
>"itty bitty" COBOL programs. But C/C++ programs do that a lot, especially
>C++ programmers.

I agree. I don't understand why they don't use F4SA/F5SA, as documented 
in the Assembler Services Guide. I hope that they reconsider.

-- 
Tom Marchant

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to