On 30/04/2021 4:30 am, Charles Mills wrote:
Hmmm. I shared David's impression but http://publibfp.dhe.ibm.com/epubs/pdf/i1357010.pdf
lists LE as a "Target System Mandatory Operational Requisite."
The xlclang++ compiler is IBMs fork of LLVM which uses the clang front
end to produce intermediate code for the TOBY back-end. That is part of
the XL C/C++ compiler and relies on LE.
This is different. If you read the link again IBM clearly state they are
porting the open source LLVM/Clang with the libc++ runtime. This is not
LE. You can see that IBM are already commiting changes
to LLVM. This is open source stuff
https://reviews.llvm.org/rGcb2d2ae56ae3f0554c40c2d7f231ca5058e4d50c
Charles
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Linda Chui
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2021 12:11 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Meta languages [was: RE: Assembler Language Programming for IBM
System z Servers]
On Thu, 8 Apr 2021 18:27:06 +0800, David Crayford <dcrayf...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 6/04/2021 9:53 pm, Charles Mills wrote:
You don't use templates
I certainly do use templates. Not sure how you get "don't use templates" from what I
wrote. Heck, I *over* used templates in the first large C++ project I ever did, and boy, does that
make a mess! Now I think I am down to a happy medium. I don't see them as "competitive"
(in a design sense) with macros.
Overusing as in template meta-programming?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_metaprogramming
The XL C++ compiler is withering on the vine. The word is that IBM don't
the resources to keep it up to date with the current standards so the
xlclang++ port of clang using the existing Toby back-end is the way to
go. If you use PDS data sets for your source your SOL as it's z/OS UNIX
only and only produces 64-bit modules.
But what I find exciting is that IBM have stated their intentions to
fully port LLVM/clang/libc[++] to z/OS without a reliance on LE so
supervisor state programming in C++ will be a reality without the
nightmare of LE ESPIE/ESTAE condition handlers.
https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-June/142174.html
Charles
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of David Crayford
Sent: Tuesday, April 6, 2021 5:15 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Meta languages [was: RE: Assembler Language Programming for IBM
System z Servers]
On 6/04/2021 1:23 am, Charles Mills wrote:
But IMHO none easy to learn or use.
I am generally not a fan of meta languages at all. I think writing programs is
hard enough, without having to write two effective programs: one that runs at
compile time and one that runs at run time.
In my C++, which is now my primary language, I eschew the use of C macros as
much as reasonably possible. Reasonableness is a key here. For a few things,
macros make sense.
That's interesting. You don't use templates which are one the most
powerful features of C++?
Well, I didn't see a reference to LE in our statement of direction at
https://community.ibm.com/community/user/ibmz-and-linuxone/blogs/robert-barrington1/2020/08/04/ibm-cc-and-fortran-compilers-to-adopt-llvm
I believe the compiler will require LE for the foreseeable future, though if
you want to request an LE free mode, I’m sure you can put in a request for it
at the RFE site https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rfe/
Hope this helps.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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