On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Edward Jaffe <[email protected]> wrote: > On 4/7/2011 9:42 AM, Angel Luis Domínguez wrote: >> >> On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 14:32:56 +0300, Binyamin Dissen >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> LE will LOAD the module on the first call and then BALR the later calls. >>> Change your ASM module to LOAD it and BALR as well. >> >> I did it and now the results are for the same work in cpu seconds >> >> ASSEMBLER: 10,584402 versus COBOL: 15,438726 > > I keep attending IBM presentations that assert the code generated by the C > compiler will outperform assembler. Some programmers I respect have asserted > the > same thing. Every time I look into this I see the wonders of the C > compiler's > optimizer--which understands cache effects and how to best use the System z > instruction pipe line. > > Empirically, however, I have yet to find a program written in C or any other > language that can actually outperform a well-written assembler language > program. > Every time I think I've finally found the example that proves these > assertions, > it turns out the assembler program is doing something inefficient (like this > case with LOADing a service module over and over) and, once fixed the > assembler > language program runs faster. > > Is it just me?? >
How algorithmically intensive are the programs you have compared? > -- > Edward E Jaffe > Phoenix Software International, Inc > 831 Parkview Drive North > El Segundo, CA 90245 > 310-338-0400 x318 > [email protected] > http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/ >
