[fpc-devel] Re: EBCDIC (was On a port of Free Pascal to the IBM 370)
stevie at collector.org
Mon Jan 30 22:01:35 CET 2012
I seem to have messed up the subject lines on some of these posts. Sorry.
>> It's not any problem to move the binary itself, but there is more required
>> than the binary itself in order to produce an executable load module on any
>> OS version. (I can't comment on VM or DOS cause they are a mystery to me).
>> An OS binary consists of more than the binary and I know of no way to build
>> that information on Linux or Windows.
> That's not the case when the target is Linux: as with all distreaux and
> variants, the program compiles to a single file:
Yeah. Hence the repeated references to OS :) I have had no contact with
Linux/390 so I can't possibly comment.
> We look forward to your notes. My understanding is that at least one
> variant of FPC (the one targeting x86) can use multiple assembler
> notations, so the exact format of the assembly source might turn out not
> to be a problem. More of a problem would be is 370 Assembler conventions
> turned out to be incompatible with FPC code generation.
That sounds useful.
> > Once a initial port to 370 has been made and the assembler output
> > generator is implemented (which means that the compiler can basically
> > generate 370 capable assembler files) this is rather easy as FPC can
> > generate "link on target" scripts (and AFAIK also "assemble on target").
> Assuming that the target operating system has any concept of an
> executable script. Steve's already told us that you can't generate a
> binary externally, and it might turn out that the compiler will have to
> generate a JCL (or comparable) deck which is then processed in some way
> on the target rather than being executed directly.
JCL IS an executable script. But there are terminal based scripting
facilities available too. Running such a task on a terminal however,
would have less storage available to it.
More information about the fpc-devel