>Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 11:20:36 -0500 >From: Scott Fagen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: PL/S ??
>Additionally, I'd suspect that I could find a bright C programmer and get >them useful on METAL C faster than PL/X. IBM doesn't do anything without >some level of informed self interest. Perhaps they are having trouble >locating good PL/X programmers themselves? >Bait and switch? I don't think so. Unrealistic expectations? More likely. >Scott Fagen >Enterprise Systems Management Hi Scott, long time no see. I have heard several comments from programmers that PL/X is showing its age and doesn't generate very efficient code, especially for AMODE 64. The IBM C compiler has, for many years, had an offering called "System Programmer C", which let you compile things like SMF exits in C. It was packaged as a separate link edit time SYSLIB that would resolve a limited set of C external references, and create a stand-alone load module that had no run-time library requirements. This Metal C sounds like a logical follow-on to SPL C, with more facilities and much better support. With the right optimization options specified, C can generate very efficient code as well, much better than PL/S code. Tom Russell "Stay calm. Be brave. Wait for the signs." -- Jasper FriendlyBear "... and remember to leave good news alone." -- Gracie HeavyHand ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
