The trouble with us darn mainframers -- we don't do change very well. __asm came along to C++ somewhere around V2R2 or V2R3.
Thanks. I will have to give DEVTYPE a shot and figure out how to translate it into __asm. I've never done __asm (for the aforementioned reasons). Charles -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of David Crayford Sent: Monday, July 29, 2019 8:04 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: XTIOT impact? __asm() is perfectly valid for C++. I used it all the time. > On 30 Jul 2019, at 6:00 am, Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> wrote: > > Thanks. __asm is C but not C++, unfortunately. > > Charles > > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Farley, Peter x23353 > Sent: Monday, July 29, 2019 5:37 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: XTIOT impact? > > If all you need to know is whether a DD name is allocated or not, I think the DEVTYPE macro is the simplest method. Any non-zero return code indicates non-existence once you have the macro invocation working (there is a "syntax" RC that you will never get after you have it coded to work). > > And DEVTYPE is very simple to code as an "__asm" statement in XL C/C++. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
