Sorry if I've confused the matter. What I meant was that only a very few important and relatively simple changes to the definition of OBJ objects and load module programs are made (nothing that would require new constructs). AMODE 64 is an example of one of those. Other than those, new capabilities are implemented only in GOFF and Program Objects.
On Wed, 27 Jan 2016 13:40:38 -0600, Ed Gould wrote: > On Jan 27, 2016, at 11:25 AM, Barry Lichtenstein wrote: > > > It's not the JCL per-se. The combination of XOBJ object modules > > and the Prelinker was a tactical solution to advancements in > > programs, originally created for C programs. XOBJ object modules > > addressed several deficiencies in OBJ object modules, such the > > ability to have long case-sensitive external symbol names. > > > > While it does the intended job, the Prelinker has several > > drawbacks, such as the inability to incrementally rebind a module > > so created (read "csect replacement"). The prelinker does not > > handle GOFF object modules such as produced by C/C++ with XPLINK > > and COBOL V5. GOFF object modules can define characteristics of a > > program which cannot be represented in a load module. > > > > Note that the binder has been producing program objects for over 25 > > years. It is difficult to make significant enhancements to OBJ > > object module and load module formats. Some important things have > > been added such as AMODE 64 and quad-word alignment. > > > > barry_lichtenst...@us.ibm.com > > Since COBOL does not and will not in the foreseeable future need > amode 64 I find the argument un helpful. > > Ed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
