Walt, Some of it would be difficult unless you embed at least some assembler in the Metal C stuff. For example, all date handling is removed from Metal C even the capability of getting the system date although that is trivial in assembler. There are other things that are missing from Metal C that probably do not need to be.
Another example is that if you want to be able to allocate lasting memory (i.e. malloc) in Metal C, you have to embed some assembler; See the example in the Metal C user's guide. The example works, but there is assembler there (the load of register 12). Lloyd ----- Original Message ---- From: Walt Farrell <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Fri, April 13, 2012 11:11:35 PM Subject: Re: Modernizing the BCP code ? On Fri, 13 Apr 2012 15:05:57 -0400, Scott Ford <[email protected]> wrote: >Reading through this thread, quickly, it very obvious that certain exits must >be >in Assembler. >So your kind of a captive audience. I am speaking of security type products. I >have beem experimenting in C , not being a C > >heavy, it would be nice and desirable to do them in C . But sure if IBM >supports >ICHPWX01 in C ... Are there really system exits that -must be- in Assembler? Wouldn't Metal C work instead? (Yes, you might need to provide some control block mappings yourself, of course, but that really doesn't mean the language can't be used; just that it may be a bit inconvenient, depending on what you want to look at.) (And by the way, I'm pretty sure that Metal C would work for ICHPWX01 (RACF new password exit). You can even use System REXX if you want.) -- Walt ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
