I prefer use z/XDC to interactively debug MetalC code, using the assembler listing of the MetalC output as a reference.
But if I didn't have z/XDC available I'd try using ASMIDF from the HLASM toolkit for the same task. As for post-mortem abend analysis, I think Dumpmaster would do some analysis for you if you fed him the assembler listing and the dump together. Don't know what other tools might be able to do. I don't think there is any tool that could post-mortem analyze a MetalC dump at the C source level. HTH Peter > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Justin R. Bendich > Sent: Friday, April 08, 2011 3:56 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: ASM vs HLL (Was: CPU: ASSM vs ENTERPRISE COBOL - SOLVED!) > > On Fri, 8 Apr 2011 07:35:09 -0400, Peter Relson <[email protected]> wrote: > > >[...] > >An interesting, but almost inevitable, phenomenon is that if you started > >with two programs, one in asssembler, one in a HLL, both highly > optimized, > >over time, as that program is modified, the assembler one usually gets > >worse, and the HLL one gets better. > > > >That's because the HLL one gets to benefit from advances in compiler > >optimization technology upon recompilation. > >And the assembler one suffers from the "what register is it safe to use" > >and "can I safely rely on having access to this control sructure here" > >paradigms that many assembler modifications must go through. The answer > is > >often not "the register that is best for the overall optimization of the > >module" and "yes, so I do not have to reload as much". The cost of > >analyzing/optimizing the whole program again is not usually justifiable > >when making a modification. > > This has the ring of truth. Personally, i like programming in a high- > level language (C++ being more high-level than C, e.g.), but the dumps > are harder to analyze. Then, shops i've been in want to use Dignus instead > of the IBM compiler, mainly because of LE. But now y'all have Metal. > Does it put enough annotations anywhere to allow some tool other than IPCS > to analyze dumps at the source-level? -- This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your system.
