] on behalf of Tim
Hare [haresystemssupp...@comcast.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 5:28 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: z/OS use of "legacy" programming languages
I know there's still a VS FORTRAN compiler on a machine I work on - is it still
supported, or does it just "
I know there's still a VS FORTRAN compiler on a machine I work on - is it still
supported, or does it just "work". Haven't seen updates for it in forever; we
are running down what was compiled with it that may still be running. All the
important stuff moved to a FORTRAN supplied by another
://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of
zMan [zedgarhoo...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, July 3, 2020 12:53 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: z/OS use of "legacy" programming lan
W dniu 02.07.2020 o 16:39, Clark Morris pisze:
[Default] On 2 Jul 2020 02:13:34 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
r.skoru...@bremultibank.com.pl (R.S.) wrote:
snip
BTW: As a mainframe bigot I sometimes am forced to explain why so old
things are still in use. Yes, z14 or z15 is veery old. As
Charles Mills [charl...@mcn.org]
> Sent: Thursday, July 2, 2020 1:28 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: z/OS use of "legacy" programming languages
>
> Why do you have to be so hostile? I did not see any mention of OS
> compatibility. That is precisely w
son.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of
Charles Mills [charl...@mcn.org]
Sent: Thursday, July 2, 2020 1:28 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: z/OS use of "legacy" programming languages
Why do you have to be
] On
Behalf Of Seymour J Metz
Sent: Thursday, July 2, 2020 9:48 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: z/OS use of "legacy" programming languages
WTF? Where do you see "OS compatibility"? The issues that I raised were all
architecture and instruction set.
--
Shmuel (S
f
Charles Mills [charl...@mcn.org]
Sent: Thursday, July 2, 2020 12:39 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: z/OS use of "legacy" programming languages
If you are going to include OS compatibility as well as hardware
compatibility then there are issues such as control blocks that h
: Thursday, July 2, 2020 9:07 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: z/OS use of "legacy" programming languages
> The only thing which might not work would
> be something which was CPU speed dependent.
That's not the only thing. A program that relies on getting certain pr
[joemon...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 2, 2020 6:55 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: z/OS use of "legacy" programming languages
Honestly, this whole discussion is kind of pointless, no?
z/os IBM/390 IBM/370 IBM/360 all share ... instruction set. While the
newer models all
ie.mck...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 2, 2020 7:12 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: z/OS use of "legacy" programming languages
On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 5:56 AM Joe Monk wrote:
> Honestly, this whole discussion is kind of pointless, no?
>
> z/os IBM/390
.NET 3.5 includes all earlier versions.
Current .NET is 4.8.x which include 4.6.2 and 4.7.2.
Joe
On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 9:39 AM Clark Morris wrote:
> [Default] On 2 Jul 2020 02:13:34 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
> r.skoru...@bremultibank.com.pl (R.S.) wrote:
>
> >> snip
> >
> >BTW: As a
[Default] On 2 Jul 2020 02:13:34 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
r.skoru...@bremultibank.com.pl (R.S.) wrote:
>> snip
>
>BTW: As a mainframe bigot I sometimes am forced to explain why so old
>things are still in use. Yes, z14 or z15 is veery old. As old as
>z/OS 2.4, or DB2. It is hard job,
[Default] On 1 Jul 2020 21:39:05 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
sme...@gmu.edu (Seymour J Metz) wrote:
>Do you mean only that IBM has changed the underlying hardware used to
>implement what they called Machine Interface (MI) on the S/38, or do you mean
>that they have changed the MI itself?
I
On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 5:56 AM Joe Monk wrote:
> Honestly, this whole discussion is kind of pointless, no?
>
> z/os IBM/390 IBM/370 IBM/360 all share ... instruction set. While the
> newer models all have newer instructions, object code assembled on a 360 is
> just as valid today as it was in
Honestly, this whole discussion is kind of pointless, no?
z/os IBM/390 IBM/370 IBM/360 all share ... instruction set. While the
newer models all have newer instructions, object code assembled on a 360 is
just as valid today as it was in 1960.
Joe
On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 4:13 AM R.S. wrote:
>
W dniu 01.07.2020 o 20:57, Frank Swarbrick pisze:
Thanks Tim.
I can't imagine being comfortable writing new code, at least, for a compiler
that has not been updated in 35 years, but maybe that's just me.
Now that we know what languages are still supported, I am still curious if
anyone out
Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of
Clark Morris [cfmt...@uniserve.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 1, 2020 9:56 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: z/OS use of "legacy" programming languages
[Default] On 1 Jul 2020 14:43:51 -0700, in bit.listserv.ib
On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 21:43:42 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>Comfort isn't the only issue. When they change the law such that the code no
>longer complies, then you have to bite the bullet and update it? Lost the
>source code? There could be legal consequences. YMMV.
>
For such reasons,
[Default] On 1 Jul 2020 14:43:51 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
sme...@gmu.edu (Seymour J Metz) wrote:
>Comfort isn't the only issue. When they change the law such that the code no
>longer complies, then you have to bite the bullet and update it? Lost the
>source code? There could be legal
[frank.swarbr...@outlook.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 1, 2020 2:57 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: z/OS use of "legacy" programming languages
Thanks Tim.
I can't imagine being comfortable writing new code, at least, for a compiler
that has not been updated in 35 years, but maybe that
.
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Timothy Sipples
Sent: Wednesday, July 1, 2020 12:07 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: z/OS use of "legacy" programming languages
Frank Swarbrick asked:
>Is Pascal also still supported/
On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 14:07:08 +0800, Timothy Sipples wrote:
>
>... And obviously IBM markets and supports ..., REXX, ...
>
As long as "support" isn't construed to imply ANSI conformance.
-- gil
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff
/me wonders how many script kiddies have gotten excited to learn there's
apparently a language specifically for creating role-playing games...
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 2:07 AM Timothy Sipples wrote:
> Frank Swarbrick asked:
> >Is Pascal also still supported/used?
>
> IBM VS Pascal (5668-767) is
Frank Swarbrick asked:
>Is Pascal also still supported/used?
IBM VS Pascal (5668-767) is still IBM marketed and supported:
https://www.ibm.com/support/lifecycle/#/details?q45=M618799U16404L24
The New Stanford Pascal Compiler is also available:
https://github.com/StanfordPascal/Pascal
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of
Arthur [ibmmain.10.ats...@xoxy.net]
Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2020 3:38 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: z/OS use of "legacy" programming languages
On 30 Jun 2020 12:18:01 -0700, in bit.listserv.i
On 30 Jun 2020 12:18:01 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
(Message-ID:)
frank.swarbr...@outlook.com (Frank Swarbrick) wrote:
Some time ago I noticed that z/OS Language Environment has
support for both "FORTRAN IV" and "VS FORTRAN" (FORTRAN 77
standard), even though the latest Fortran compiler
27 matches
Mail list logo
