Thread: [Cobolforgcc-devel] New code added
Status: Pre-Alpha
Brought to you by:
timjosling
Menu
▾
▴
cobolforgcc-devel
|
From: Tim J. <te...@me...> - 2001-04-12 20:38:30
|
I have now added tested code for move including move corresponding, and I have enhanced compute to support exponentiation now. The task list for the core compiler subset now includes all the features that are needed for it so you can see how far I've gotten so far. Still to go, in order - bug in initialiation of group items - continue - exit - if - perform - 88 levels - pic [s]9(n) binary/comp-6. - call enter with parameters exit program and goback - external data items - user defined functions and function invocation - function and program pointers I think I am now a couple of months from having this all done, Tim Josling |
|
From: William M. K. <wm...@ix...> - 2001-04-12 22:13:22
|
Tim, I have seen you mention COMP-6 is a couple of notes. Any chance that this was a "typo" for COMP-5? If not, then COMP-6 is a "relatively" unused and non-portable USAGE. The most common (that I know) definition of it is an UNSIGNED packed-decimal item. COMP-5 is QUITE common in PC and UNIX COBOL's (as is - of course COMP-1, COMP-2, and COMP-3). > -----Original Message----- <snip> > Still to go, in order > - pic [s]9(n) binary/comp-6. |
|
From: Tim J. <te...@me...> - 2001-04-13 08:13:51
|
Bill, I thought comp-6 was IBM for binary. I will check. It will be optional, turned on by the -fibm option. Tim Josling "William M. Klein" wrote: > > Tim, > I have seen you mention COMP-6 is a couple of notes. Any chance that this > was a "typo" for COMP-5? If not, then COMP-6 is a "relatively" unused and > non-portable USAGE. The most common (that I know) definition of it is an > UNSIGNED packed-decimal item. > > COMP-5 is QUITE common in PC and UNIX COBOL's (as is - of course COMP-1, > COMP-2, and COMP-3). > > > -----Original Message----- > <snip> > > Still to go, in order > > > - pic [s]9(n) binary/comp-6. > > _______________________________________________ > Cobolforgcc-devel mailing list > Cob...@li... > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobolforgcc-devel |
|
From: William M. K. <wm...@ix...> - 2001-04-13 14:13:02
|
IBM "traditionally" only supports COMP (binary on mainframe and PC / Packed-Decimal on OS/400) COMP-1 (short float) COMP-2 (long float) COMP-3 (packed decimal - all platforms) COMP-4 (binary - all platforms) "relatively recently" they have added support for COMP-5 as "true binary" (no truncation to Picture) on PC and Mainframe (I don't know if OS/400 support this yet or not). Other WinTel vendors also use COMP-5 vs COMP to distinguish "little-endian" vs "big-endian" Binary. I don't (off the top of my head) remember whether IBM's PC compiler also has this distinction. COMP-6 as an "unsigned packed-decimal" came from RM (I think). I know that Micro Focus supports it (for compatibility with some other compiler) and there may be some others that do as well. > -----Original Message----- > From: cob...@li... > [mailto:cob...@li...]On Behalf Of Tim > Josling > Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 3:07 AM > To: cob...@li... > Subject: Re: [Cobolforgcc-devel] New code added > > > Bill, > I thought comp-6 was IBM for binary. I will check. It will be > optional, turned on by the -fibm option. > Tim Josling > > "William M. Klein" wrote: > > > > Tim, > > I have seen you mention COMP-6 is a couple of notes. Any > chance that this > > was a "typo" for COMP-5? If not, then COMP-6 is a "relatively" > unused and > > non-portable USAGE. The most common (that I know) definition > of it is an > > UNSIGNED packed-decimal item. > > > > COMP-5 is QUITE common in PC and UNIX COBOL's (as is - of course COMP-1, > > COMP-2, and COMP-3). > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > <snip> > > > Still to go, in order > > > > > - pic [s]9(n) binary/comp-6. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Cobolforgcc-devel mailing list > > Cob...@li... > > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobolforgcc-devel > > _______________________________________________ > Cobolforgcc-devel mailing list > Cob...@li... > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobolforgcc-devel |
|
From: Tim J. <te...@me...> - 2001-04-13 22:16:31
|
Bill, Thanks. I will have various options for comp, in which they get translated into the internal comp format. It is amazing how liitle I knew of COBOL after using it all these years. For example I didn't know you could do this: 01 x. 02 y pic 999 value 123 occurs 100000. Even entry in the table gets set to 123. Or this 01 x value "ABC". 02 xx pic x occurs 3. Tim Josling "William M. Klein" wrote: > > IBM "traditionally" only supports > COMP (binary on mainframe and PC / Packed-Decimal on OS/400) > COMP-1 (short float) > COMP-2 (long float) > COMP-3 (packed decimal - all platforms) > COMP-4 (binary - all platforms) > > "relatively recently" they have added support for COMP-5 as "true binary" > (no truncation to Picture) on PC and Mainframe (I don't know if OS/400 > support this yet or not). Other WinTel vendors also use COMP-5 vs COMP to > distinguish "little-endian" vs "big-endian" Binary. I don't (off the top > of my head) remember whether IBM's PC compiler also has this distinction. > > COMP-6 as an "unsigned packed-decimal" came from RM (I think). I know that > Micro Focus supports it (for compatibility with some other compiler) and > there may be some others that do as well. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: cob...@li... > > [mailto:cob...@li...]On Behalf Of Tim > > Josling > > Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 3:07 AM > > To: cob...@li... > > Subject: Re: [Cobolforgcc-devel] New code added > > > > > > Bill, > > I thought comp-6 was IBM for binary. I will check. It will be > > optional, turned on by the -fibm option. > > Tim Josling > > > > "William M. Klein" wrote: > > > > > > Tim, > > > I have seen you mention COMP-6 is a couple of notes. Any > > chance that this > > > was a "typo" for COMP-5? If not, then COMP-6 is a "relatively" > > unused and > > > non-portable USAGE. The most common (that I know) definition > > of it is an > > > UNSIGNED packed-decimal item. > > > > > > COMP-5 is QUITE common in PC and UNIX COBOL's (as is - of course COMP-1, > > > COMP-2, and COMP-3). > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > <snip> > > > > Still to go, in order > > > > > > > - pic [s]9(n) binary/comp-6. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Cobolforgcc-devel mailing list > > > Cob...@li... > > > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobolforgcc-devel > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Cobolforgcc-devel mailing list > > Cob...@li... > > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobolforgcc-devel > > _______________________________________________ > Cobolforgcc-devel mailing list > Cob...@li... > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobolforgcc-devel |
|
From: William M. K. <wm...@ix...> - 2001-04-14 00:28:44
|
Both of the VALUE with OCCURS clause "variations" were enhancements in the '85 Standard. The '75 Standard did *not* allow both of those (as I recall). > -----Original Message----- > From: cob...@li... > [mailto:cob...@li...]On Behalf Of Tim > Josling > Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 5:10 PM > To: cob...@li... > Subject: Re: [Cobolforgcc-devel] New code added > > > Bill, > > Thanks. I will have various options for comp, in which they get > translated into the internal comp format. It is amazing how > liitle I knew of COBOL after using it all these years. > > For example I didn't know you could do this: > > 01 x. > 02 y pic 999 value 123 occurs 100000. > > Even entry in the table gets set to 123. > > Or this > > 01 x value "ABC". > 02 xx pic x occurs 3. > > Tim Josling > > "William M. Klein" wrote: > > > > IBM "traditionally" only supports > > COMP (binary on mainframe and PC / Packed-Decimal on OS/400) > > COMP-1 (short float) > > COMP-2 (long float) > > COMP-3 (packed decimal - all platforms) > > COMP-4 (binary - all platforms) > > > > "relatively recently" they have added support for COMP-5 as > "true binary" > > (no truncation to Picture) on PC and Mainframe (I don't know if OS/400 > > support this yet or not). Other WinTel vendors also use COMP-5 > vs COMP to > > distinguish "little-endian" vs "big-endian" Binary. I don't > (off the top > > of my head) remember whether IBM's PC compiler also has this > distinction. > > > > COMP-6 as an "unsigned packed-decimal" came from RM (I think). > I know that > > Micro Focus supports it (for compatibility with some other compiler) and > > there may be some others that do as well. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: cob...@li... > > > [mailto:cob...@li...]On Behalf Of Tim > > > Josling > > > Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 3:07 AM > > > To: cob...@li... > > > Subject: Re: [Cobolforgcc-devel] New code added > > > > > > > > > Bill, > > > I thought comp-6 was IBM for binary. I will check. It will be > > > optional, turned on by the -fibm option. > > > Tim Josling > > > > > > "William M. Klein" wrote: > > > > > > > > Tim, > > > > I have seen you mention COMP-6 is a couple of notes. Any > > > chance that this > > > > was a "typo" for COMP-5? If not, then COMP-6 is a "relatively" > > > unused and > > > > non-portable USAGE. The most common (that I know) definition > > > of it is an > > > > UNSIGNED packed-decimal item. > > > > > > > > COMP-5 is QUITE common in PC and UNIX COBOL's (as is - of > course COMP-1, > > > > COMP-2, and COMP-3). > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > <snip> > > > > > Still to go, in order > > > > > > > > > - pic [s]9(n) binary/comp-6. > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Cobolforgcc-devel mailing list > > > > Cob...@li... > > > > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobolforgcc-devel > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Cobolforgcc-devel mailing list > > > Cob...@li... > > > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobolforgcc-devel > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Cobolforgcc-devel mailing list > > Cob...@li... > > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobolforgcc-devel > > _______________________________________________ > Cobolforgcc-devel mailing list > Cob...@li... > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobolforgcc-devel |
|
From: Fred M. <fr...@mo...> - 2001-04-14 10:08:25
|
"William M. Klein" wrote: > > Both of the VALUE with OCCURS clause "variations" were enhancements in the > '85 Standard. The '75 Standard did *not* allow both of those (as I recall). The '75 standard did not allow a VALUE clause in an entry with the OCCURS clause. It did, however permit a VALUE clause for a group field, which can of course contain subordinate data items with an OCCURS clause. Regards, Fred > > From: cob...@li... > > [mailto:cob...@li...]On Behalf Of Tim > > Josling > > > > Thanks. I will have various options for comp, in which they get > > translated into the internal comp format. It is amazing how > > liitle I knew of COBOL after using it all these years. > > > > For example I didn't know you could do this: > > > > 01 x. > > 02 y pic 999 value 123 occurs 100000. > > > > Even entry in the table gets set to 123. > > > > Or this > > > > 01 x value "ABC". > > 02 xx pic x occurs 3. -- Fred Mobach - fr...@mo... - pos...@mo... Systemhouse Mobach bv - The Netherlands - since 1976 The Free Transaction Processing Monitor project : http://www.ftpm.org/ |
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X