> -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin > Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 12:20 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: How bad is the EX instruction? <Snipped> > On Jan 17, 2012, at 10:11, John Gilmore wrote: > > > > The IBM optimizing machinery for C/C++ and PL/I is now shared, the > > same for both compilers; and the effects of this sharing have been > > mixed, mostly good and some few of them very bad. > > Sounds like an opportunity for PL/X to join the party. > > How's Metal/C?
Pretty good, in my limited investigations. When the highest level of optimization is turned on, it can be rather tricky to follow the generated assembler code even knowing precisely what the C code was intended to do. I haven't yet measured the speed of the generated code in any meaningful way for a non-trivial program, but I am seriously impressed by the optimizations that are done and by the compiler's ability to "tune" the instruction set used so that code can be generated that will run on "z" machines from a given architecture level upwards. Peter -- 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.
