What about usage of 64 bit dataspaces ...without calling Assembler Scott ford www.identityforge.com from my IPAD
> On Jan 19, 2015, at 4:54 PM, Clark Morris <cfmpub...@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote: > > On 14 Jan 2015 16:57:26 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote: > >>> Hi,I am looking for COBOL compiler option to compile our COBOL programs in = >>> 64 Bit mode.Please lead me if you have such a experience .The COBOL version= >>> is 4.2 on Z9 with z/OS 1.12. Best regardsManshadi >> >> AMODE 64 COBOL is still being worked on here at IBM. >> >> I (like the other poster) would like to know what you would do with AMODE 64 >> COBOL? >> Also, does everyone realize that AMODE 64 code will run slower than AMODE 31 >> code? >> We assume that AMODE 64 COBOL will be used for very specialized one-off cases >> to solve specific business problems, and that in general 99% of code will be >> compiled for AMODE 31 even after we ship AMODE 64 COBOL. >> >> Unlike AMODE 31, which we expected EVERYONE to move to (still waiting :-) we >> do not think very many users will need AMODE 64 in the next 10-15 years. >> We are gathering use cases and verifiable needs for AMODE 64 COBOL, so if >> you know of any, please SHARE! (get it? :-) > If I were working at a site, 64 bit could be very important if any of > the following were true. > > 1. My COBOL routine is used by 64 bit Java or the current 31 bit > routine is holding up a conversion to 64 bit Java. > > 2. My COBOL routine or program is used by a PL1, HLASM or C/C++ > program and there is benefit to upgrading that program to 64 bit and > the COBOL program is holding up that conversion because it can't > interoperate without severe performance penalty. > > 3. My COBOL program needs to be upgraded to deal with large binary > objects such as pictures or videos. I suspect this would be rare but > 15 minutes of HD 60p video at MP4 compression takes 4+ gigabytes. > > 4. There are features in DB2, CICS or IMS that take advantage of 64 > bit and that are available to PL1, HLASM and C/C++ but not COBOL. > > Enough has changed in the application environment since my last > contract (2006) that I am unaware of a lot of the newer application > needs. One reason for moving more rapidly on 64 bit is that language > choice for an application extension may be forced by the need for 64 > bit and while COBOL would be the default choice in a shop, another > language would be chosen. > > Clark Morris >> >> Cheers, >> TomR >> COBOL is the Language of the Future! << >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
