Sounds like what is done by the GNU compiler people. From what I've read, all the GNU compilers utilize the same "back end" code generator. IIRC, at one time the non-C compilers really did a <language> to C conversion, followed by a C compile. I don't know if I have the terminology correct, but now all the compilers in the GCC collection emit a "parse tree"(?) and pass that to the common back end for actual optimization and code generation.
Now if they would just create a COBOL and PL/I compiler "front end", I would be in 7th heaven. -- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets(r) 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone * [email protected] * www.HealthMarkets.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Edward Jaffe > Sent: Friday, April 13, 2012 1:10 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Modernizing the BCP code ? > > On 4/13/2012 10:46 AM, David Crayford wrote: > > On 14/04/2012 1:38 AM, Edward Jaffe wrote: > >> On 4/12/2012 9:03 AM, David Crayford wrote: > >>> AFAIK, the PL/X compiler shares a back-end with the other > code optimizers, > >>> so should produce excellent code. > >> > >> Not yet. > >> > > > > So does that mean that the PL/X compiler produces inferior > code to the Metal/C > > compiler? That would be disappointing considering the > majority of the > > operating system is writen in PL/X! > > Yes. This has been one of the justifications for not having a > new z/OS > Architectural Level Set i.e., the existing PL/X compiler > cannot generate code > that takes advantage of the newer hardware features, so why > force customers to > upgrade unnecessarily? The compiler was given to the folks in > Toronto a > couple/few years ago with the intent of having it enhanced > with the "smart" back > end used for other IBM compilers. Given that z/OS V2.1 will > require z9 > processors there is even more pressure on Toronto to deliver > this much needed > "plumbing" enhancement. > > -- > Edward E Jaffe > Phoenix Software International, Inc > 831 Parkview Drive North > El Segundo, CA 90245 > 310-338-0400 x318 > [email protected] > http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/ > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
