Steve Comstock wrote: >re whether we'll expect customers to be running Enterprise PL/I: >And the answer is?
Oops...meant to answer this. Um...I guess "whatever's current" was my assumption. Are the older compilers supported? Re our C prototype: >Do you really have the ellipsis? If so, my reading >of the docs is that all arguments after int *inputLength, >will have to be of that type (that is, all pointers to >integer values) and not pointer to char followed by pointer >to int; of course, you can play games. But I think that >would be a problem. >Generally, the above C function will expect, when it is >called, to have R1 set up this way: >(R1) -> a(magic) > a(inputBuffer) > a(inputLength) > a(outputBuffer) > a(outputLength) That isn't the behavior we've observed. >So how, in your C code, do you currently check how >many arguments have been received? >This won't be hard, really, :-) , but we need to pay >attention to detail. High-bit. >What's weird to me is that PL/I and C share parts of >the same compiler logic! Ah well. Indeed. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
