Joe Monk  wrote:   
   >   
   > > If you wish to state that the very first mainframe C compiler,   
   > > probably by Ritchie, was the only unique C compiler...   
   >   
   > Ritchie didnt write C on a mainframe. He wrote C on a PDP-7 machine. It is   
   called C because it is a follow on of B, which was also developed on a PDP-7,   
   both of which were running Unix.   
   >   
   > The (much) better systems language for the mainframe is assembler.   
      
   Apparently IBM folks do not agree.  Modern mainframe gcc port   
   (not the old one Paul is using) was created by IBM folks for   
   writing system software.  Later, when IBM decided to support   
   Linux on its mainframes it was extended and released as Linux   
   compiler.  Now, if you write about official IBM C, you may   
   be right: system folks wanted several extentions which are   
   present in gcc, but absent in IBM C.  And it seems that porting   
   gcc was easier than adding extentions to IBM C (which partially   
   may be due to internal politics).   
      
   Also, if you are IBM customer, than for system work assembler is   
   better supported (I do not know if there is any support for   
   using new gcc on MVS).   
   --   
                                 Waldek Hebisch   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)