On 7/18/2011 9:22 AM, Charles Mills wrote:
The Mainframe version written in Assembler. The PC version is written in
C.
Somewhat OT but why? Why not C on the mainframe? Why two code bases, one
fairly easy to debug and one relatively hard to debug?
Perhaps there are historical reasons - one version existed long
before Clement decided to add PC support, and the C route looked
easier than converting mainframe assembler to PC?
I am thrilled with writing software for the mainframe in C (C++ actually)
after years of laboring in assembler.
Good for you, but some of us have built extensive macro and
subroutine libraries to use with assembler, and find it as fast
and easy to use those than to live with (the confining
limitations of) higher level languages. De gustibus.....
Gerhard Postpischil
Bradford, VT
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
