On Tue, 3 Oct 2023 12:12:29 +, Peter Relson wrote:
> ...
>PL/X does have the concept of a variable-length string (with the length being
>in a separate variable, or in a preceding halfword).
>
PostScript has a fairly opaque "substring" with at lest 3 components:
o the st
Oct 3, 2023, at 8:22 AM, Eric D Rossman wrote:
> In the very first message with this new subject line, Clem Clarke said "We
> know that C searches for a byte with a binary zero to find how long a string
> is." which is what I was responding to.
>
> PL/X is good for many th
In the very first message with this new subject line, Clem Clarke said "We know
that C searches for a byte with a binary zero to find how long a string is."
which is what I was responding to.
PL/X is good for many things. C is good for many things. So are Java, and
Python and Go and
PL/X, on the average, is not really better than C in terms of what you describe
except when the string's length is known in advance (which is hard or
impossible in many circumstances
I didn't see stated in any post on this topic the explicit mention of
zero-delimited strings. That is what
I would say that "inertia" is PL/X's raison d'etre (even though that statement
is probably controversial within the internal IBM Z development community).
I will acknowledge that PL/X is excellent at integrating HLASM code. GCC style
inlining isn't terrible for including
Eric,
I'm curious - wouldn't you say that PL/X integration with assembler and
assembler macros is it's raison d'etre? Even though I've done all sorts of
integration of assembler with C/C++ (the GCC-style inlining, xplink assembler
leaf routines, EDCDSECT conversion of DSECTs, etc, etc
On Tue, 3 Oct 2023 00:03:07 +1100, Clem Clarke
wrote:
>
>PL/I, Pascal and even Assembler know how long a string is. They don't
>have to waste cycle looking for the length of a string. Most of the
>time, they know how long the receiving string is, and won't go past the
>end, as C will.
>
Have
I write PL/X daily. PL/X, on the average, is not really better than C in terms
of what you describe except when the string's length is known in advance (which
is hard or impossible in many circumstances
Don't get me wrong, it has a number of strengths as compared to C, but it also
is too close
You are correct Peter. I just asked PDF's, no compiler.. Or even an environment
to run PL/X.In past I wrote lot of PL/X programs, But I am a bit far from that
moment. I was planning to refresh my skill. Only this and no more than this.
:)BtwThank youDan
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
I would say "No, no exceptions". I don't mean that all companies are monsters,
only that moral behavior is a feature of individual humans. If a company
behaves well it's because one or more individuals within the company are making
moral decisions on its behalf.
This isn't a condemnation of
On 2023-10-02 13:03, Clem Clarke wrote:
What would it take for IBM to Open Source the Windows and Linux version of PL/I
and PL/X?
Why? To potentially make the Internet faster and safer. How?
It's pretty naive to think that open-sourcing PL/I will help, no C(++/#)
programmer is going
What would it take for IBM to Open Source the Windows and Linux version
of PL/I and PL/X?
Why? To potentially make the Internet faster and safer. How?
We know that C searches for a byte with a binary zero to find how long a
string is. This takes time. And then it take time to copy a string
quot; is for which you mention a
> "solution"? The first post I saw was asking about PDF's, not about access
> to PL/X. Was there a post that did not show up in the daily digest? The
> "access-to-PL/X ship" sailed long ago.
> >
> > Peter Relson
> > z/OS Cor
the "problem" is for which you mention a "solution"? The first post
I saw was asking about PDF's, not about access to PL/X. Was there a post that did not show up in the daily
digest? The "access-to-PL/X ship" sailed long ago.
Peter Rels
>There is another solution
What are you thinking the "problem" is for which you mention a "solution"? The
first post I saw was asking about PDF's, not about access to PL/X. Was there a
post that did not show up in the daily digest? The "access-to-PL/X ship" sai
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
> Paul Gilmartin
> Sent: Friday, September 29, 2023 4:26 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: PL/X
>
> On Fri, 29 Sep 2023 16:01:52 -0400, David Spiegel wrote:
>
> >Hi Peter,
> >There is another
ately, however, it's 40 years too late to reverse the illogical
>OCO policy.)
>
Is the rationale to thwart users who would seek support saying,
"I made only a *little*change* in the source!"
>On 2023-09-29 12:54, Peter Relson wrote:
>> Regarding PL/X documentation, wouldn't
lmost) too late to stop the Big Iron golden goose
from dying.
These 2 suggestions might cause a renewed interest for next generation
mainframers.
(Unfortunately, however, it's 40 years too late to reverse the illogical
OCO policy.)
Regards,
David
On 2023-09-29 12:54, Peter Relson wrote:
Rega
AFAIK, PL/S II was the last version for which IBM issued unrestricted
documentation; I would assume that manuals for, e.g., PL/8, PL/AS, PL/X, are
proprietary.
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Peter Relson
Sent: Friday, September 29
Regarding PL/X documentation, wouldn't sharing such information outside of IBM,
in the absence of having some sort of license agreement, be "bad form" (or
worse)?
Peter Relson
z/OS Core Technology Design
--
Fo
HiI am looking for old PL/X 3.2 PDFs...Does anyone has it?
Thank youDan
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message
21 matches
Mail list logo
