I would not blame PL/1 for this.
It is not OK IMHO to request the caller to set the
high order bit on the last parameter, when the number of the parameters
is fixed
(see also my GDDM example on the other post). This is not required by
any OS convention,
at least that's my understanding.
Kind regards
Bernd
Am 11.04.2012 00:19, schrieb Frank Swarbrick:
I don't know if this is relevant, but I was looking at the PL/I DL/I (IMS)
interface (PLITDLI) and noticed that they actually have to pass, as the first
parameter, a fullword containing the remaining number of items! Crazy!
For example, in COBOL you say:
call 'CBLTDLI' using ghnp, pcb-mask, i-o-area, ssa-1 ssa-2.
In PL/I it looks like you'd do something like this:
call PLITDLI (five, ghnp, pcb-mask, i-o-area, ssa-1 ssa-2);
See here for more details:
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/dzichelp/v2r2/index.jsp?topic=%2Fcom.ibm.ims11.doc.apg%2Fims_imsdbpliapp.htm
I was pretty happy about what I learned about PL/I until I saw this. Yuck!
Frank
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
