Hi;
On 24/02/14 14:51, Patrick wrote:
My facts:
Is it fair to say that everyone that has committed code to the project
has access to a mainframe?
Nope, but some of use use Hercules and can access
MVS 3.8J with a IBM ANSI 68 lvl2 compiler.
Is it fair to say that in the 13+ years of development < 10 people have
contributed code?
I suspect more.
If I want to add feature FOO how do I ensure it will work on an
architecture I will never have access to?
You offer it to be tested on other platforms before committing it, however
if it is only *nix platform, it is not an issue.
What if we created a branch and simplified the codebase? I would be
willing to try this, although I may never get the time to finish.
We already have branches set up for various variants and I can only wish you luck in trying to simplify the code but you will have your work cut out in doing so.
The main codebase could continue, the mainframe guys could take code as
they see fit and the desktop people could work away. Sure the two could
get out of sequence but at the pace things are moving at right now,
It is being worked on by people currently unknown to me to get it working under MVS 3.8J (and later) using the GCC v3 compiler that has been migrated to the same system and other later one's but there are many issues as OC need a lot of external tools to compile and more importantly run. I hope to work on this in the next month or so.
The code for this will be fairly different as a lot of dependencies have to be changed as well as the whole file accessing sub systems to name but a few. I hope to start disassembling the IBM cobol compiler for specific load modules to understand the linkages and other modules called which hopefully will help in working out a strategy for OC migration.
would that really be such a big deal?
Everyone is welcome to help improve the compiler.
Just my 4 pennies worth :)
Vincent