kerravon86 | 18 Dec 11:44 2007
Picon

IEV90

When I was programming on MVS around 1987, the assembler we were
using was IEV90. IBM have come up with new names since then.

Given that my code is all compatible with IEV90, and if it wasn't
for the AMODE, RMODE and GETMAIN LOC=BELOW, it would also be
compatible with IFOX, is there any reason why I shouldn't make
IEV90 the assembler I use in my procedures? If IBM were to
release MVS/XA, then this would work out of the box.

It's similar to coding in C90 instead of C99. The code works
on more platforms. If there's no reason to use extensions,
then I don't want to. I most certainly want the modules to
be marked ANY/ANY, so I do want an assembler that supports
those constructs. Any reason to not go ahead and change all
my JCL to that?

I can't call IBM's procs, because the assembler is part of a
compile proc already, and you can't get one proc to call
another proc (I believe).

BFN. Paul.

__._,_.___
Recent Activity
Visit Your Group
Need traffic?

Drive customers

With search ads

on Yahoo!

Y! Messenger

Quick file sharing

Send up to 1GB of

files in an IM.

Fitness Challenge

on Yahoo! Groups

Get in shape w/the

Special K Challenge.

.

__,_._,___

Gmane