Well, @Captain, I stand corrected.
(That was me in error.)
Charles
On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 13:20:58 -0800, Tom Ross wrote:
>>On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 14:59:20 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wr=
>>ote:
>>
>>>It would be a disservice to customers to retire 24-bit support berore
>>>all IBM programming interfaces s
>On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 14:59:20 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wr=
>ote:
>
>>It would be a disservice to customers to retire 24-bit support berore
>>all IBM programming interfaces support AMODE 31.
>
>Do *any* of the modern compilers (C, COBOL, PL/I) "support 24-bit addressin=
>g"? What would that mean, exact
t; Sent: Monday, November 4, 2024 1:01 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: 32 bit
>
> Caution: This email did not originate from George Mason’s mail system. Do
> not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and
> know the content is safe.
>
>
> &qu
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Joe
Monk <05971158733e-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
Sent: Monday, November 4, 2024 1:01 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: 32 bit
Caution: This email did not originate from George Mason’s mail system. Do not
Sorry, I misspoke. The only OS that could use 32-bit addressing on a model
67 was TSS.
http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/ibm/360/tss/C28-2008-0_TSSsysPgmr_Oct67.pdf
Joe
On Mon, Nov 4, 2024 at 1:04 AM Jay Maynard <
05997213d6c2-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> Didn't CP/67 support 32-bit a
Didn't CP/67 support 32-bit addresses as well?
On Mon, Nov 4, 2024 at 12:03 AM Joe Monk <
05971158733e-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> "I understand the model 67 supported 32-bit addresses."
>
> 1. It was an PRPQ
> 2. the only OS support for 32-bits was in ACP/TPF
>
> Joe
>
> On Sun,
"I understand the model 67 supported 32-bit addresses."
1. It was an PRPQ
2. the only OS support for 32-bits was in ACP/TPF
Joe
On Sun, Nov 3, 2024 at 2:59 PM Paul Gilmartin <
042bfe9c879d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 15:45:07 -0500, Linda Chui wrote:
> > ...
On Sat, 2 Nov 2024 18:33:14 +0100, Bernd Oppolzer
wrote:
>Hello all,
>
>I have a question only slightly related to the original topic, but maybe
>someone can provide a short answer:
>
>we are planning to upgrade to z/OS 3.1 next year, and with the new OS,
>we get a new C compiler,
>which (AFAIK)
On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 14:59:20 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>It would be a disservice to customers to retire 24-bit support berore
>all IBM programming interfaces support AMODE 31.
Do *any* of the modern compilers (C, COBOL, PL/I) "support 24-bit addressing"?
What would that mean, exactly? Their l
On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 15:45:07 -0500, Linda Chui wrote:
> ...
>The IBM Open XL C/C++ 2.1 for z/OS compiler describes most of the details in
>the documentation at https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/open-xl-c-cpp-zos/2.1 , and
>more specifically about the linkages at
>https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/open-xl-c
Tried to reply privately - but it bounced..
It's my understanding that the older IBM compiler continues to be supported for
some time yet, which affords a little time.
And - of course - there is the Dignus compiler - which continues to support IBM
mode for older programs and isn't tied to parti
Hello all,
I have a question only slightly related to the original topic, but maybe
someone can provide a short answer:
we are planning to upgrade to z/OS 3.1 next year, and with the new OS,
we get a new C compiler,
which (AFAIK) is part of the OS and has the same version number (3.1).
So:
Hi Linda,
thank you - and your colleague - very much for this answer. I think people who
use 31-bit and 32-bit interchangeably are missing a bit - the one that I
sometimes used to weed out impostors in job interviews. Also, Ed de Castro's
"no mode bit!" (From The Soul of a New Machine - Tracy K
On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 13:47:36 +0100, René Jansen wrote:
>Reading through the release notes (the "what's new") of the LLVM-Clang based
>C/C++ compiler for z/OS I see support for 32-bit programs and XPLINK32
>linkage. Now I have to admit that I not followed all news closely but I even
>have a hard
נֵ֣צַח יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל לֹ֥א יְשַׁקֵּ֖ר
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on
> behalf of Mike Schwab <05962a42dc49-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
> > Sent: Friday, November 1, 2024 1:15 PM
>
riday, November 1, 2024 1:15 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: 32 bit
>
> Caution: This email did not originate from George Mason’s mail system. Do not
> click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
> content is safe.
>
>
>
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Mike Schwab <05962a42dc49-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
Sent: Friday, November 1, 2024 1:15 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: 32 bit
Caution: This email did not originate from George Mason’s mail
I don't know if this is the case here, but it is possible to write a
program to run in addressing mode 64 but use 32 bit instructions so it
works inside the 4GB address range.
On Fri, Nov 1, 2024 at 11:46 AM Tony Harminc wrote:
>
> On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 at 08:59, René Jansen wrote:
>
> > Reading th
On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 at 08:59, René Jansen wrote:
> Reading through the release notes (the "what's new") of the LLVM-Clang
> based C/C++ compiler for z/OS I see support for 32-bit programs and
> XPLINK32 linkage. Now I have to admit that I not followed all news closely
> but I even have a hard time
19 matches
Mail list logo
