|
>> It's not impossible by any means but it requires a significant change in the mindset of existing iSeries software consumers. Today, if I compile for TGTRLS(V5R2), I only need to tell my customers that this software runs on V5R2. It also requires a significant change in IBM's thinking - and I'm not just talking about the compiler team. Assume for the moment that Hans, Barbara and the rest of the Toronto team decide tomorrow that their next release will be backward compatible. How far back can it go? Well - unless there is a significant change in IBM's (not just Toronto's) thinking - the likelihood is that V5R1 would be the absolute earliest release you could ever hope for. Why? because IBM does not issue PTFs for out of service releases. So one of two things would have to happen - either they change that policy and start issuing PTFs for out of service releases (an event that might possibly occur about two years after hell freezes over) or alternatively the Labs start issuing fixes independently of the PTF mechanism. Being realistic, that won't happen either - it just isn't practical. Besides, the vast majority of people who have V4R5 or later are updating their releases, it is the ones who never moved off V3R6/7 (or are still on white boxes) that are the problem and there is no way the compilers could ever target that far back. As to open sourcing the compiler - I can't see it happening. Even if Toronto would give up the source to the compiler, it would require that the details of w-code and/or MI prime be made available. Since these are proprietary and require the agreement of multiple groups within IBM .... well let's just say I am not holding my breath. The only practical option would be to build a new compiler that generated (say) C code. Frankly I think we'd all be better served by focusing on: 1) open source projects for the development of a comprehensive library of procedures and functions and 2) Instead of ranting about the compiler, focus our energies on lobbying IBM to fix the bloody operational descriptors so that we can write the kind of universal routines (like Joe's %Move) that we all dream of building. To paraphrase the comments that an IBM manager once wrote on my appraisal "We all need to be a bit more selective in our choice of windmills to tilt at". Jon Paris Partner400 www.Partner400.com
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
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.