You are, of course, right but using LET just means you should pay attention to your binder listings!
-----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On Behalf Of Tony Harminc Sent: Friday, May 5, 2023 5:46 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: XLC - Weak symbols On Fri, 5 May 2023 at 10:54, Robin Atwood <abend...@gmail.com> wrote: > You don't need to do anything in the C code but the Binder will give a > missing external reference (IEW2456E) message. You can specify LET in > the Binder options to treat RC=8 as non-fatal. > This, imho, is a Very Bad Idea. Once you start with telling the Binder OK: RC 8 is fine, then at some point you'll get a real RC 8 for something else, and it'll get into your build unnoticed. BTDT with SMP/E too many times... Tony H. -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On > Behalf Of Neale Ferguson > Sent: Friday, May 5, 2023 2:53 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: XLC - Weak symbols > > Is it possible to declare a “weak” symbol with XLC? i.e. Using GNU C I > can either > > #pragma weak yyyy > extern void * yyyy; > extern void * xxxx __attribute__((weak)); > > But neither of these forms are accepted by XLC and I can’t see > anything in the language reference. > > I want to define a symbol that may or may not be present at link time > such that it is NULL if not found but don’t want the linker flagging > it as an error (a warning is fine). > > Neale > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
