t liable for any such corruption,
> interception, tampering, amendment or viruses or any consequence thereof.
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of billogden
> Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2025 10:28 AM
>
W dniu 21.03.2025 o 08:04, Andrew Rowley pisze:
On 21/03/2025 11:18 am, Mike Schwab wrote:
Yep. z/OS has 3 incompatible versions of Java, so far.
What do you mean by incompatible?
I'm developing under Java 17 on a PC, and the same compiled jar runs
on the PC and on z/OS under both Java 8 and
On 21/03/2025 11:18 am, Mike Schwab wrote:
Yep. z/OS has 3 incompatible versions of Java, so far.
What do you mean by incompatible?
I'm developing under Java 17 on a PC, and the same compiled jar runs on
the PC and on z/OS under both Java 8 and Java 11. Seems pretty compatible.
Can you elab
: Re: IBM-MAIN Digest - 18 Mar 2025 to 19 Mar 2025 (#2025-76)
>For compiler listings and actual assembler listings, and assembler
>inlines, and for interfacing with z/OS via its macro interfaces, PL/X
>has always had a huge advantage over C/C++.
AMEN
For someone working on important
Please don't submit messages with: "Subject: ... Digest ...".
On Thu, 20 Mar 2025 10:27:51 -0400, billogden wrote:
>>For compiler listings and actual assembler listings, and assembler inlines,
>>and for interfacing with
>>z/OS via its macro interfaces, PL/X has always had a huge advantage over
>
>For compiler listings and actual assembler listings, and assembler inlines,
>and for interfacing with
>z/OS via its macro interfaces, PL/X has always had a huge advantage over
>C/C++.
AMEN
For someone working on important, complex, long-term (decades) applications,
it might appear that C/C+
