>> > The existence of a good port of GNU C/C++ for OpenVMS would make >porting >> Open >> > Source tools to OpenVMS easier, which would benefit some enterprise >> development. >> >> Well you are making exactly my point which is that a Unix-like >interface >> might be nice for porting Open Source tools, but I still don't see >the >> need >> for the Gnu C compiler itself. There are not many >tools/applications that >> have to be compiled with Gnu C in order to work. > >That's probably true. Still, there are a lot of shops that do most of >their >development in other languages like Java and PL/SQL who might benefit >from >casual use of a C compiler, but HP would have to weigh this benefit to >customers >against the potential for losing DECC license sales.
I would like to add the shops that use VMS-native compilers (Fortran, Cobol, Pascal, etc). If GCC delivers a non-VMS object format, it is of no use at all. Even if it did - what would be the benefit (except the cost)? A Unix-like interface would indeed be handy - but the GNV CC-wrapper does just that, if I'm informed well. Take a look at http://www.4ovms.dyndns.org/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=17 for an overview. But not a unix-style one in stead of a VMS-style one, and a decent HELP specification. That rules GCC out - for the moment. The compiler is one thing. What about: * exception ahndling (status, messages...) * RECORD-based IO in stead of STREAM-IO * Naming conventions. These are more important issues than just the compiler. You can port a program so it runs, but if it cannot co-operate with natively built programs properly, the effort is useless. Willem Grooters OpenVMS developer & System manager e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] w: www.grootersnet.nl
