Exactly. There is no best language. There is only the best available language for the task at hand.
Charles -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ze'ev Atlas Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 4:23 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Fair comparison C vs HLASM - Thank you Kirk Wolf I also coded in Assembler but no longer doing that (although I could). I totally agree that Compilers are the way to go. One can tell the C compiler what is the minimum (oldest) hardware to compile for, and which hardware to optimize for, and the compiled product is optimized better than any human can do, utilizing the best commands to do the job. I did not check the COBOL or PL/I documentation lately, but I assume they do have similar options. Yes, Assembler has its place. In the PCRE library that I maintain, we resorted to Assembler, not for efficiency but in order to handle the REXX API since REXX is not an LE language and dealing with stems is not standard. It is easier to deal with that in Assembler and the techniques for such handling are well established and well understood. I do not think that we used any real esoteric command. ZA Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android Tom> wrote: On Tue, 30 Jan 2018 13:32:17 -0500, David Cole wrote: >Thank you Kirk for reposting by "The Pointlessness of handwriting >'efficient' code" article! Sometimes I put these things out there and >am deafened by the silence. It's nice to know that someone is listening. Yes, many of us were listening. It was good to read your article again. It is a classic. Right up there with the article by Ken Dubbo many years ago. -- Tom Marchant
