Open Source PL/1 Compilers? 
Author Message
 Open Source PL/1 Compilers?

Does anyone know of any Open Source PL/1 compilers?  I looked in the
FAQ ( http://www.*-*-*.com/ ) and could not
find any references.

Thanks,
Andru
--
Andru Luvisi, Programmer/Analyst

Quote Of The Moment:
  C. A. R. Hoare once said that ``One thing [the language designer] should
  not do is to include untried ideas of his own.''  Ratfor follows this
  precept very closely -- everything in it has been stolen from someone
  else.
                -- Brian W. Kernighan, "RATFOR A Preprocessor for a
                                        Rational fortran"



Fri, 03 Jun 2005 12:16:59 GMT  
 Open Source PL/1 Compilers?
IBM's PL/I(F) compiler is now open-source, as is (IIRC) Digital
Research's PL/I-86.
Quote:

> Does anyone know of any Open Source PL/1 compilers?  I looked in the
> FAQ (http://www.faqs.org/faqs/computer-lang/pli-faq/) and could not
> find any references.

> Thanks,
> Andru
> --
> Andru Luvisi, Programmer/Analyst

> Quote Of The Moment:
>   C. A. R. Hoare once said that ``One thing [the language designer] should
>   not do is to include untried ideas of his own.''  Ratfor follows this
>   precept very closely -- everything in it has been stolen from someone
>   else.
>                 -- Brian W. Kernighan, "RATFOR A Preprocessor for a
>                                         Rational Fortran"



Sat, 04 Jun 2005 06:58:56 GMT  
 Open Source PL/1 Compilers?

    Peter> IBM's PL/I(F) compiler is now open-source, as is (IIRC)
    Peter> Digital Research's PL/I-86.

Could I trouble you for a link to PL/I(F)?  I did some searches on
IBM's site, but the PL/I pages I found did not mention Open Source and
the Open Source pages I found did not mention PL/I.

Thanks,
Andru
--
Andru Luvisi, Programmer/Analyst

Quote Of The Moment:
  C. A. R. Hoare once said that ``One thing [the language designer] should
  not do is to include untried ideas of his own.''  Ratfor follows this
  precept very closely -- everything in it has been stolen from someone
  else.
                -- Brian W. Kernighan, "RATFOR: A Preprocessor for a
                                        Rational Fortran"



Sun, 05 Jun 2005 00:35:23 GMT  
 Open Source PL/1 Compilers?

:     Peter> IBM's PL/I(F) compiler is now open-source, as is (IIRC)
:     Peter> Digital Research's PL/I-86.

: Could I trouble you for a link to PL/I(F)?  I did some searches on
: IBM's site, but the PL/I pages I found did not mention Open Source and
: the Open Source pages I found did not mention PL/I.

IMHO, PL/I(F) always was "Open Source" -- but there is a catch. The
compier is writen in I370 assembly (BAL) and generates code for I370.
I have the sources, but I did not manage to produce executables from
it -- beeing on PC I fetched I370 emulator (Hercules) and set up
MVS, but I had no time to write a script (JCL) to assemble executables.

--
                              Waldek Hebisch



Sun, 05 Jun 2005 03:07:57 GMT  
 Open Source PL/1 Compilers?
Noi problem.  I'll have to wait until I get to work tomorrow.  At worst
I can e-mail you a zip file.  So far I've found a couple of minor
problems with the library (no TCAM  support in modern OS's), and one
medium-size problem with the compiler (last 100+ lines of one module
lost, I'm reconstructing it from a disassembly).
Quote:


>     Peter> IBM's PL/I(F) compiler is now open-source, as is (IIRC)
>     Peter> Digital Research's PL/I-86.

> Could I trouble you for a link to PL/I(F)?  I did some searches on
> IBM's site, but the PL/I pages I found did not mention Open Source and
> the Open Source pages I found did not mention PL/I.

> Thanks,
> Andru
> --
> Andru Luvisi, Programmer/Analyst

> Quote Of The Moment:
>   C. A. R. Hoare once said that ``One thing [the language designer] should
>   not do is to include untried ideas of his own.''  Ratfor follows this
>   precept very closely -- everything in it has been stolen from someone
>   else.
>                 -- Brian W. Kernighan, "RATFOR: A Preprocessor for a
>                                         Rational Fortran"



Sun, 05 Jun 2005 05:35:56 GMT  
 Open Source PL/1 Compilers?


Quote:
>IMHO, PL/I(F) always was "Open Source" -- but there is a catch. The
>compier is writen in I370 assembly (BAL)

No, it was written is Assembler (F), IEUASM.

Quote:
>I have the sources, but I did not manage to produce executables from
> it -- beeing on PC I fetched I370 emulator (Hercules) and set up
>MVS, but I had no time to write a script (JCL) to assemble
>executables.

MVS comes with Assembler (XF), which is not fully compatible with
Assembler (F). If you copy Assembler (F) from OS/60, it should run
perfectly well under MVS.

--
     Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT

Any unsolicited commercial junk E-mail will be subject to legal
action.  I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any
abusive E-mail.

I mangled my E-mail address to foil automated spammers; reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me.  Do not



Fri, 10 Jun 2005 00:05:13 GMT  
 Open Source PL/1 Compilers?



: >IMHO, PL/I(F) always was "Open Source" -- but there is a catch. The
: >compier is writen in I370 assembly (BAL)

: No, it was written is Assembler (F), IEUASM.

: >I have the sources, but I did not manage to produce executables from
: > it -- beeing on PC I fetched I370 emulator (Hercules) and set up
: >MVS, but I had no time to write a script (JCL) to assemble
: >executables.

: MVS comes with Assembler (XF), which is not fully compatible with
: Assembler (F). If you copy Assembler (F) from OS/60, it should run
: perfectly well under MVS.

Thanks for clarification, I still have to learn about flavours of IBM
assemblers.
--
                              Waldek Hebisch



Fri, 10 Jun 2005 04:42:09 GMT  
 Open Source PL/1 Compilers?

Quote:




> : >IMHO, PL/I(F) always was "Open Source" -- but there is a catch. The
> : >compier is writen in I370 assembly (BAL)

> : No, it was written is Assembler (F), IEUASM.

> : >I have the sources, but I did not manage to produce executables from
> : > it -- beeing on PC I fetched I370 emulator (Hercules) and set up
> : >MVS, but I had no time to write a script (JCL) to assemble
> : >executables.

> : MVS comes with Assembler (XF), which is not fully compatible with
> : Assembler (F). If you copy Assembler (F) from OS/60, it should run
> : perfectly well under MVS.

> Thanks for clarification, I still have to learn about flavours of IBM
> assemblers.
> --
>                               Waldek Hebisch


There are virtually no incompatibilities going from F to XF.  The only
problem I'd expect to see would be an old macro with the name of a new
opcode (which, of course, is always a problem for any assembler upgrade).

--
John W. Kennedy
"The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly;
the rich have always objected to being governed at all."
   -- G. K. Chesterton, "The Man Who Was Thursday"



Fri, 10 Jun 2005 06:11:45 GMT  
 Open Source PL/1 Compilers?
I've assembled almost all of PL/I(F) compiler and library with HLASM on
OS/390 and VM/ESA.  No incompatibilities except that QTAM (or is it
TCAM? I get them mixed up) is no longer supported by current-level
macros.  The old macros are available, and should be upward-compatible,
but my choice is to comment-out the QTAM stuff.  If IEMAK (IIRC) wasn't
screwed up, I'd have a VM-version re-assembled by now.
Quote:





> > : >IMHO, PL/I(F) always was "Open Source" -- but there is a catch. The
> > : >compier is writen in I370 assembly (BAL)

> > : No, it was written is Assembler (F), IEUASM.

> > : >I have the sources, but I did not manage to produce executables from
> > : > it -- beeing on PC I fetched I370 emulator (Hercules) and set up
> > : >MVS, but I had no time to write a script (JCL) to assemble
> > : >executables.

> > : MVS comes with Assembler (XF), which is not fully compatible with
> > : Assembler (F). If you copy Assembler (F) from OS/60, it should run
> > : perfectly well under MVS.

> > Thanks for clarification, I still have to learn about flavours of IBM
> > assemblers.
> > --
> >                               Waldek Hebisch

> There are virtually no incompatibilities going from F to XF.  The only
> problem I'd expect to see would be an old macro with the name of a new
> opcode (which, of course, is always a problem for any assembler upgrade).

> --
> John W. Kennedy
> "The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly;
> the rich have always objected to being governed at all."
>    -- G. K. Chesterton, "The Man Who Was Thursday"



Fri, 10 Jun 2005 06:41:56 GMT  
 Open Source PL/1 Compilers?

Quote:

> I've assembled almost all of PL/I(F) compiler and library with HLASM on
> OS/390 and VM/ESA.

It doesn't surprise me.  About the only upward incompatibility, apart
from the inevitable namespace problems, in 360/370/390/zSeries
assemblers is the XFR opcode, which was used in early 360 environments
less than a proper operating system.  (It produced a 12-2-9 XFR object
record, which stopped loading and transferred control to the program,
like a premature END; after the program had done some processing, it was
expected to transfer back to the loader.  The XFR instruction was
expected to be followed by a backward ORG, followed by code which would
overlay the code that XFR had branched to.)

Quote:
> No incompatibilities except that QTAM (or is it
> TCAM? I get them mixed up) is no longer supported by current-level
> macros.

QTAM was supported by the F compiler's final version, TCAM by the
Optimizing Compiler.  TCAM was a replacement from the ground up of QTAM
(like ISAM -> VSAM).  Neither was ever broadly adopted (except for using
TCAM as a TSO driver, before VTAM supported TSO), because they were best
suited to hard-copy terminals doing stateless transactions, a design
that had already peaked by the time QTAM shipped.  (Where that _was_ the
environment, however, QTAM or TCAM was about 'leventy-seven times more
productive.)

--
John W. Kennedy
"The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly;
the rich have always objected to being governed at all."
   -- G. K. Chesterton, "The Man Who Was Thursday"



Sat, 11 Jun 2005 01:22:23 GMT  
 Open Source PL/1 Compilers?


Quote:
>I've assembled almost all of PL/I(F) compiler and library with HLASM
>on OS/390 and VM/ESA.  No incompatibilities except that QTAM (or is
>it TCAM? I get them mixed up) is no longer supported by current-level
>macros.

It would be TCAM, and you could always grab the macro libraries from
OS/360 or SVS in order to get through the assemblies.

Maybe it's time to ask Waldek to post the error messages he was
getting.

--
     Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT

Any unsolicited commercial junk E-mail will be subject to legal
action.  I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any
abusive E-mail.

I mangled my E-mail address to foil automated spammers; reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me.  Do not



Sat, 11 Jun 2005 01:40:16 GMT  
 Open Source PL/1 Compilers?


Quote:
>There are virtually no incompatibilities going from F to XF.

A Fin and "virtually no" will buy you a cup of coffee; I've run into
stuff that would only assemble on F, long after it should have been
defunct. FWIW, I've also run into stuff that would assemble on XF but
not on H. Given that he's already had trouble assembling the compiler,
the obvious thing to try was to use the correct assembler. But from
Peter's post it would appear that the problem lies elsewhere.

Quote:
>The only
>problem I'd expect to see would be an old macro with the name of a
>new  opcode

Strangely enough, that's a problem that I never ran into going from F
to XF. The dependencies that I encountered related to the macro
language.

--
     Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT

Any unsolicited commercial junk E-mail will be subject to legal
action.  I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any
abusive E-mail.

I mangled my E-mail address to foil automated spammers; reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me.  Do not



Sat, 11 Jun 2005 01:39:57 GMT  
 Open Source PL/1 Compilers?

Quote:


>>I've assembled almost all of PL/I(F) compiler and library with HLASM
>>on OS/390 and VM/ESA.  No incompatibilities except that QTAM (or is
>>it TCAM? I get them mixed up) is no longer supported by current-level
>>macros.
> It would be TCAM, and you could always grab the macro libraries from
> OS/360 or SVS in order to get through the assemblies.

No, it was QTAM for the (F) compiler.

--
John W. Kennedy
"The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly;
the rich have always objected to being governed at all."
   -- G. K. Chesterton, "The Man Who Was Thursday"



Sun, 12 Jun 2005 00:24:25 GMT  
 Open Source PL/1 Compilers?


Quote:
>TCAM was a replacement from the ground up of QTAM

From the logic manuals it looked more like a major upgrade than a
truly new component. A lot of the structure was the same.

Quote:
>Neither was ever broadly adopted (except for using
>TCAM as a TSO driver, before VTAM supported TSO), because they were
>best  suited to hard-copy terminals doing stateless transactions,

QTAM and TCAM had store-and-forward, something that VTAM never had.
Think of it as a primitive version of MQ.

--
     Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT

Any unsolicited commercial junk E-mail will be subject to legal
action.  I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any
abusive E-mail.

I mangled my E-mail address to foil automated spammers; reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me.  Do not



Sun, 12 Jun 2005 00:57:58 GMT  
 Open Source PL/1 Compilers?


Quote:
>No, it was QTAM for the (F) compiler.

Then he needs to grab the macro library from OS/3360 rather than SVS.
It should be on the turnkey CD.

--
     Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT

Any unsolicited commercial junk E-mail will be subject to legal
action.  I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any
abusive E-mail.

I mangled my E-mail address to foil automated spammers; reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me.  Do not



Mon, 13 Jun 2005 01:45:27 GMT  
 
 [ 16 post ]  Go to page: [1] [2]

 Relevant Pages 

1. Source code for PL/C (or any Subset G) compiler

2. Looking for PL/I source for GAUSS compiler

3. NEW PL/1 COMPILER and SOURCE TRANSLATOR TO C

4. NEW PL/1 COMPILER and SOURCE TRANSLATOR TO C

5. Open-source release of MLj 0.2: a Standard ML to Java bytecode compiler

6. commerce, fp, Open Source Software(tm) (was: Re: Functional , compilers in the mainstream)

7. Open source Component Pascal compiler for JVM and .NET

8. COBOL Open Source (Free) Compiler

9. open source or freeware compiler

10. PL/I (was: IBM Needs to seed the PL/I Compiler)

11. Open Source/Open Science conference announcement

12. open source (and open standard)

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software