I love the structured programming macro's (SPM). They make the code so much more readable, logical and maintainable. My only suggestion would be logical indentation (> and < in place of the label where >>> represents 3 indents).
As for C optimization, do you think IBM changes it as new instructions are implemented? I would have thought the reducing CPU workload would be a downside for IBM. There are many things I like about C. It's far more accessible to the average person and is a vast improvement to non-IBM asm. Regards, Jon. On Tuesday, January 23, 2018 1:25 PM, Ed Jaffe <[email protected]> wrote: On 1/22/2018 7:44 AM, Jon Perryman wrote: > If anyone tells you C is superior to HLASM, don't believe it. I agree with a lot of what you've written. We use SPMs for our coding (with FLOWASM of course) and a LOT of powerful macros for calling services, building tables, etc. One thing I do like from C is that the compiler can optimize the object code for a particular generation of hardware -- automatically taking advantage of new instructions as they become available. In HLASM the instructions are hand-coded and therefore cannot be automatically optimized. -- Phoenix Software International Edward E. Jaffe 831 Parkview Drive North El Segundo, CA 90245 http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/
