On Sat, 25 Oct 2025 16:11:52 -0400, Phil Smith III <[email protected]> wrote:
>There are solutions to offload IBM Z workloads. Some of these solutions involve interpretation. So any of those are not in the same arena as my native x64 solution. > But then you get down to that huge core app that's been > developed over the last 30/40/50/60 years, and porting > that to Java or C or whatever ... well, you could do it, > probably, but it would take years Ok, here my attitude is simply "serves you right for not writing your application in C90". You may or may not be able to recover from that, with something like GNU Cobol. But that's largely out of scope for me. I'm demonstrating what could happen if you had written in C90. Also, it's not necessarily the main application that gets ported. You could keep that on the mainframe for integrity. But you may have a need for a massive search of your data, and you are happy to write a C program to do that. You're not allowed to run your massive search on the mainframe - too expensive - but you do have permission to COPY the mainframe data onto a PC. So there you have it. > Well, with ES, you can probably/mostly move it unchanged. > You recompile, and ES lets you use your existing JCL, > emulates CICS, etc. You'll need to rework any assembler, > of course. But many large applications really are pure > COBOL and/or PL/I so that doesn't even come up, I'm told. Ok, sounds like a solution exists already for that. I'm not really trying to compete with a professional system. > Anyway, your thing could perhaps do something similar, but > I'd suggest that since these apps are probably more COBOL > and PL/I than C, saying "You can recompile with gcc" isn't > really going to solve most folks' problem. Sure. But if it can be done in C90, maybe it can be done in those other languages too. It sounds like it already has been done - so that's fine too. > Sounds like another fun project, but I'd be scared to run that > in production, personally. So ... don't run it in production. Just offload massive searches or whatever. > You, at least, seem to be safe from IBM going after you. > Microsoft? Not sure... It would be amusing to watch one of those companies go after a private individual writing freeware on their own computer in their own home. On what charge? Being annoying isn't a crime. BTW, I have rewritten pdos.org from scratch. The previous iteration was adhoc as more and more stuff became available. This one simply explains the current state of affairs, especially the concepts that underpin PDOS-generic. BFN. Paul. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
