On Saturday, April 17, 2021 at 11:12:38 PM UTC+10, Paul Edwards wrote:
> https://github.com/s390guy/SATK/commits/master/README
>
> and I can see that on 2014-08-13 he cited 3.3 as an
> explicit requirement.
Note that the work I was doing to make a C90-compliant
version of Python 3.3 hasn't
On 4/16/2021 4:02 PM, Paul Edwards wrote:
On Saturday, April 17, 2021 at 5:13:31 AM UTC+10, Paul Rubin wrote:
Paul Edwards writes:
I have succeeded in producing a Python 3.3 executable despite being
built with a C library that only supports C90.
Not surprising. CPython was restricted to C90
On Saturday, April 17, 2021 at 8:12:52 PM UTC+10, jak wrote:
> I looked at the "asma" folder and noticed that some files were touched 6
> years ago. I could deduce from this that the authors might have an older
> version, perhaps developed for an older version of python, probably for
> the 2.x
Il 17/04/2021 10:56, Paul Edwards ha scritto:
On Saturday, April 17, 2021 at 7:52:07 AM UTC+10, jak wrote:
one thing is not clear to me, do you absolutely need to use "asma"?
http://www.z390.org/
I forgot to mention that it also requires Java. So instead
of porting Python to the S/3X0 I
On Saturday, April 17, 2021 at 2:37:23 PM UTC+10, Dan Stromberg wrote:
> > I want to produce EBCDIC executables that run on a
> > S/3X0 (or z/Arch) machine (even if I personally do
> > that via emulation).
> >
> I thought EBCDIC was analogous to ASCII?
EBCDIC is an alternative to ASCII. E.g.
On Saturday, April 17, 2021 at 7:52:07 AM UTC+10, jak wrote:
> one thing is not clear to me, do you absolutely need to use "asma"?
>
> http://www.z390.org/
I forgot to mention that it also requires Java. So instead
of porting Python to the S/3X0 I would need to port
Java.
Note that Java (and
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 3:40 PM Paul Edwards wrote:
> On Saturday, April 17, 2021 at 7:52:07 AM UTC+10, jak wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> > one thing is not clear to me, do you absolutely need to use "asma"?
> >
> > http://www.z390.org/
>
> The link you provided is to something that runs on PC
>
On Saturday, April 17, 2021 at 7:52:07 AM UTC+10, jak wrote:
> Hi,
> one thing is not clear to me, do you absolutely need to use "asma"?
>
> http://www.z390.org/
The link you provided is to something that runs on PC
environments.
I want to produce EBCDIC executables that run on a
S/3X0 (or
Il 23/03/2021 10:23, Paul Edwards ha scritto:
Hello. I have a new operating system called PDOS
which works on both PC and mainframe, which
can be found here:
http://pdos.sourceforge.net/
I know nothing about Python, my focus is on C90,
but I wish to run this mainframe assembler, asma,
which
On Saturday, April 17, 2021 at 6:18:29 AM UTC+10, Dan Stromberg wrote:
> If asma runs there, it'd suggest you might do well to port micropython to
> PDOS instead.
>
> Micropython has the dual benefits of being small and being supported.
> CPython 3.3 doesn't even get security fixes anymore.
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 1:05 PM Paul Edwards wrote:
> On Saturday, April 17, 2021 at 5:13:31 AM UTC+10, Paul Rubin wrote:
> > Paul Edwards writes:
> > > I have succeeded in producing a Python 3.3 executable despite being
> > > built with a C library that only supports C90.
>
> > It seems to me
On Saturday, April 17, 2021 at 5:13:31 AM UTC+10, Paul Rubin wrote:
> Paul Edwards writes:
> > I have succeeded in producing a Python 3.3 executable despite being
> > built with a C library that only supports C90.
> It seems to me that you might have an easier time porting MicroPython
> than
On Wednesday, April 14, 2021 at 8:35:59 PM UTC+10, Paul Edwards wrote:
> ImportError: importlib requires posix or nt
> but I don't know what it needs to satisfy that.
>
> It's a bit strange that it can only be posix or nt when VMS is supported in
> 3.3 too.
The resolution to this problem
On Thursday, April 15, 2021 at 4:32:51 AM UTC+10, Alan Gauld wrote:
> On 14/04/2021 11:35, Paul Edwards wrote:
> > I have succeeded in producing a Python 3.3 executable
> ...
> > However, the executable doesn't work yet.
> Late to this party but how big is the assembler?
Assuming the stuff in
On 14/04/2021 11:35, Paul Edwards wrote:
> I have succeeded in producing a Python 3.3 executable
...
> However, the executable doesn't work yet.
Late to this party but how big is the assembler?
It might be easier to translate the Python to C!
I've done that in the past and with the aid of a
few
I have succeeded in producing a Python 3.3 executable
despite being built with a C library that only supports
C90. I had to provide my own mini-posix wrappers that
convert open() into fopen() etc.
With that in place, plus a compiler where char = wchar_t,
there were not a lot of changes required
On Wednesday, March 24, 2021 at 11:07:48 PM UTC+11, Christian Heimes wrote:
> > "long long" is not C90. I don't have support for that. The
> > "i370" target of GCC 3.2.3 doesn't have DI instructions
> > working. Just 32 bits. Everything is 32 bits.
> Which version of Python are you using as
On 23/03/2021 22.22, Paul Edwards wrote:
> "long long" is not C90. I don't have support for that. The
> "i370" target of GCC 3.2.3 doesn't have DI instructions
> working. Just 32 bits. Everything is 32 bits.
Which version of Python are you using as baseline? CPython requires C99
since 3.6,
On Wednesday, March 24, 2021 at 1:02:48 AM UTC+11, Chris Angelico wrote:
> > ../Objects/exceptions.c:2538: `ECONNREFUSED' undeclared (first use in this
> > function)
> >
> Ah, this sounds like an issue with your lower-level networking
> support. Does PDOS have BSD sockets? Does it have
On Tuesday, March 23, 2021 at 10:19:46 PM UTC+11, Paul Edwards wrote:
> Objects/exceptions.c: ADD_ERRNO(ConnectionRefusedError, ECONNREFUSED);
>
> Those errno are non-standard (non-C90) and I assume
> other platforms can't cope with that either. But I can't
> see how other platforms are
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 3:20 PM Michael Torrie wrote:
> On 3/23/21 5:19 AM, Paul Edwards wrote:
> > Thanks for the tip. I don't actually need it to be
> > light. I just need it to be C90-compliant.
>
> I guess the point with MicroPython is that since it can build on all
> sorts of
On 3/23/21 5:19 AM, Paul Edwards wrote:
> Thanks for the tip. I don't actually need it to be
> light. I just need it to be C90-compliant.
I guess the point with MicroPython is that since it can build on all
sorts of microcontrollers, a) it has a simpler build system and b) it is
definitely
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 11:21 PM Paul Edwards wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, March 23, 2021 at 10:19:46 PM UTC+11, Paul Edwards wrote:
> > My latest problem is this:
> >
> > Objects/exceptions.c: ADD_ERRNO(ConnectionRefusedError, ECONNREFUSED);
>
> Sorry, I forgot to include the actual error:
>
>
On Tuesday, March 23, 2021 at 10:19:46 PM UTC+11, Paul Edwards wrote:
> My latest problem is this:
>
> Objects/exceptions.c: ADD_ERRNO(ConnectionRefusedError, ECONNREFUSED);
Sorry, I forgot to include the actual error:
../Objects/exceptions.c:2538: `ECONNREFUSED' undeclared (first use in this
On Tuesday, March 23, 2021 at 9:44:03 PM UTC+11, Gisle Vanem wrote:
> Why not try to port MicroPython instead? Much lighter.
> I've ported it to MSDOS/djgpp with some success.
Thanks for the tip. I don't actually need it to be
light. I just need it to be C90-compliant.
The assembler I
Edwards wrote:
I don't wish to run configure, I want to hand-construct
the makefile. PDOS is a very simple system, so I only
want to produce a single executable, no DLLs etc. I
don't need extensions to work or anything, all I need
to be able to do is run asma.
Why not try to port MicroPython
Hello. I have a new operating system called PDOS
which works on both PC and mainframe, which
can be found here:
http://pdos.sourceforge.net/
I know nothing about Python, my focus is on C90,
but I wish to run this mainframe assembler, asma,
which was written in Python, not C:
27 matches
Mail list logo
