PL/S has several extensions, so while most of the declare statements would map over easily, some would be more difficult.
-- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on behalf of Paul Gilmartin <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2019 1:06 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: C headers in z/OS 2.4 On Tue, 17 Sep 2019 16:16:31 +0000, Seymour J Metz wrote: >I'd rather have PL/I headers. > Many macros contain PL/S alternatives. Are these PL/I compatible? ________________________________________ From: Peter Relson Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2019 9:20 AM >The eventual goal is to do the mappings in SYS1.MACLIB and many in >SYS1.MODGEN, particularly the ones that have programming interfaces. >z/OS 2.4 starts small, concentrating on the SMF records that the z/OS core >elements produce. > Good. This relieves the need for customers and ISVs to generate these by filtering SYSPRINT or ASMADATA. To what extent can these be generated by filtering the PL/S alternative sections? >The headers are provided both in a data set (e.g., SYS1.SIEAHDR.H) and >within the file system (in a new subdirectory, /usr/include/zos). >The name of the header is the same as the name of the maclib/modgen macro >(plus the ".h" suffix when in the file system). > Couldn't this duplication and its attendant maintenance and testing burden and risk be reduced by suitable use of the -I option or by making /usr/include/zos part of the conventional search order, perhaps in startup.mk? "I see everything twice" -- Catch-22 -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
