Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!alfa.berkeley.edu!bks
From: bks@alfa.berkeley.edu (Brad Sherman)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: C on IBM MVS or VM/CMS
Keywords: C IBM mainframe request
Message-ID: <1989Dec1.000456.29060@agate.berkeley.edu>
Date: 1 Dec 89 00:04:56 GMT
References: <249@dlogics.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@agate.berkeley.edu (USENET Administrator;;;;ZU44)
Reply-To: bks@alfa.berkeley.edu (Brad Sherman)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 27

In article <249@dlogics.UUCP> kam@dlogics.UUCP (Kevin Mitchell) writes:
| We're considering porting some software to IBM machines running
| MVS or VM/CMS. If you know any good information about C compilers
| on these machines, please comment.

We're currently involved with a port (about 30K lines of C) to CMS.
After cursory  experiments with SAS C, IBM C and WATCOM (i.e. 
U. of Waterloo) C, we are using WATCOM.

This decision was based purely on the completeness of the library.

Any comments from others who have ported to the IBM mainframe enviroment
would be very welcome.

A couple of questions that this port has produced:

	Close() is a void function in WATCOM.
	Is this reasonable?

	Open() cannot take a third argument (mode).
	As permissions are a non-sequitor under CMS
	this is reasonable, but could someone explain
	to me how this argument can be optional in
	a traditional C environment? ( i.e. what is
	happening on the stack? )
--
    Brad Sherman (bks@alfa.berkeley.edu)