| Newsgroups |
gmane.comp.emulators.hercules390.mvs |
| Message-ID |
<[email protected]> |
Folks
Why does the same compiler work in VM?
I haven’t tried a large program but Jay’s simple “hello World” compiles with XREF set in the options.
In fact the EXEC in VM always seems to set XREF so I assume that it will XREF larger programs…
So I have :-
001 IDENTIFICATION DIVISION.
002 PROGRAM-ID. 'HELLO'.
003 ENVIRONMENT DIVISION.
004 SOURCE-COMPUTER. IBM-360.
005 OBJECT-COMPUTER. IBM-360.
006 SPECIAL-NAMES.
007 CONSOLE IS CNSL.
008 DATA DIVISION.
009 WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
010 77 HELLO-CONST PIC x(12) VALUE 'HELLO, WORLD'.
100 PROCEDURE DIVISION.
110 000-DISPLAY.
120 DISPLAY HELLO-CONST UPON CNSL.
130 STOP RUN.
And in the listing, I get :-
CB545 V2 LVL78 01MAY72 IBM OS AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD COBOL
And later the cross reference is simple but complete
- CROSS-REFERENCE DICTIONARY
DATA NAMES DEFN REFERENCE
HELLO-CONST 00010 00013
PROCEDURE NAMES DEFN REFERENCE
000-DISPLAY 00012
So is there something wrong in way the compiler is built in MVS, is my simple program too simple, or something missing in MVS?
The COBOL compiler in VM appears to have been generated from source and appears to be an un-adulterated copy of the MVS COBOL
compiler, in that there is no custom VM front end. It is run using the “RUNPARM” module which simple generates a OS parmlist and loads the program..
Thoughts anyone?
Dave
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: 10 September 2019 12:19
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [H390-MVS] MVT COBOL under MVS3.8j.
Peppe,
Many people have had this issue. The only resolution is to remove XREF from the PARM.
Joe
On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 7:13 AM Gerhard Postpischil [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> [H390-MVS] <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote:
On 9/10/2019 6:59 AM, Giuseppe Vitillaro giuseppe-yuD/ahkh7LvrZ44/[email protected] <mailto:giuseppe-yuD/ahkh7LvrZ44/[email protected]>
[H390-MVS] wrote:
> By the way, just tested under TK4-, with
> the TK4- COBOL V2 version, SYS2.PROCLIB(COBUCLG),
> using PARM='LOAD,SUPMAP,SIZE=8192K,BUF=2048K,LIB,XREF'.
I wonder whether you can reduce the buffer size - if it's for I/O
buffers 256K or so should suffice. I doubt that it's a sysgen related
problem, but it could be something to do with the compiler generation
options?
Gerhard Postpischil
Bradford, VT
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com