On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 19:48:50 +0000, Seymour J Metz wrote: >No answer to your questions, just another question. How many z/OS or z/VM >sites are using GCC? > Too few. I lay part of the blame on EBCDIC.
On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 19:42:52 +0000, Seymour J Metz wrote: >I disagree; C is not remotely like assembly language, and the pre-processor is >pathetic compared to any other macro facility that I have seen. > There might be some argument here that the pre-processor should have been designed as a replacable module: substitute a better one, ad lib. OTOH, I worked a while with Mainsail where the generative facility was fully integrated with the compiler, as if EQU and SETA were the same operation, and there was "if declared()", not "if defined()", and SETC was simply a case of macro definition. >The confusion between pointers and arrays ... > Assembler programmers should be comfortable wth that (not that it makes it right.) When I worked with some assembler veterans who had been dragged willy-nilly into Pascal (late 1970s) the chief complaints included: "Why can't I increment a pointer to get to the next array element?" (C allows that.) And: Why can't I 'dispose' part rather than all of a block of storage obtained with 'new'?" (Not in C, either.) >and the zero-delimited strings are booby traps for the unwary. > Yup. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
