Re: Fwd: GnuCOBOL call parameter problem.

[Ron Norman]

I almost have this test case working both with and without cobcall.

It will only work without using cobcall if the COBOL subroutine has nothing like ANY LENGTH or ANY NUMERIC.

On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 2:37 PM James K. Lowden <jklowden@schemamania.org> wrote:

On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 19:49:50 -0400
Ron Norman <rjn@inglenet.com> wrote:

> Being compatible with Microfocus is an important feature of GnuCOBOL.

Agreed. 

> Just getting the C API working a few years ago was a far bit of
> effort

No doubt, and I'm glad for it. 

My point, simply, is that there's no technical *need* for cobcall
(although it could be used by programs that expect it).  libcob is
written in C, and its functions are C functions.  I'm hoping you will
explain what dependencies exist in libcob on cobcall, so that they
can be removed, thereby making cobcall strictly optional. 

That would not only make mixing C and Cobol easier; it should simplify
code generation and interaction between the compiled module and the
runtime library. 

--jkl

--

Cheers

Ron Norman