× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



Jon;

Have you started a thread on the forum (I don't see one) to request PCML improvements or am I missing something?

I agree that a fully functional PCML definition could be extremely useful. I could see the binder using it for procedure overloading and validating, dynamic binding, programmatically examining/listing/documenting procedure interfaces, replacing copybook prototypes...

Duane Christen


--


Duane Christen
Senior Software Engineer
(319) 790-7162
Duane.Christen@xxxxxxxxxx

Visit PAETEC.COM


-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jon Paris
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 8:03 PM
To: Midrange-L Midrange-l; Rpg400 Rpg400-L
Subject: PCML Enhancement requests

(X-posted to RPG400-L)

There have been a number of threads here in recent months concerning the fact that PCML is far less useful than it could be because it fails to include a number of valid native data types (such as dates).

In recent years the compiler folks have taken the initiative to generate PCML as a file - or imbedded into the program object. This offered many possibilities for tool builders and others to be able to perform a modicum of introspection against programs and procedures to discover the number and types of parameters that they required. Sadly the lack of full native data type support renders this almost useless for such purposes.

PCML is no longer just used for Java, and already supports constructs such as structures which Java does not directly support. So why continue to restrict it to data types that Java directly supports?
PCML has the potential to be so much more than simply a parameter definition mechanism for Java interfaces if only the "missing" data types were added to the PCML definition.

For some years now I've been trying to find out who in IBM "owns" the PCML definition in order to be able to request such enhancements. A friend in IBM has finally been able to track down the fact that the team that "owns" PCML accept requests for enhancements via this forum:

http://www-912.ibm.com/j_dir/JTOpen.nsf/%28$All%29?OpenView

If like me you would like to see some enhancements made to PCML then please make your voice heard on this site.


Jon Paris

www.Partner400.com
www.SystemiDeveloper.com



--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.