Between PL/I (F) Version 4 and 5, a fix broke the optimization of unaligned bit strings, V5 generated calls to library routines for code that V4 would translate into inline TM and such. The "Optimizing" compiler continued to generate library calls for that code, making analysis of SMF data slower than it ought to be. I'm curious as to whether IBM ever corrected that.
I don't recall the Transient Library as being very expensive, but I understand why it could be an issue. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [[email protected]] on behalf of allan winston [[email protected]] Sent: Friday, March 25, 2022 10:26 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: PL/I question >From 1970 to 1972, I was in a shop that made the transition from PL/I F to the PL/I optimizing compiler. I would frequently use the LIST compiler option to look at the machine code generated and found that the PL/I F compiler generated quite poor code, frequently having to make a library call just to implement the SUBSTR function. By contrast, the PL/I optimizing compiler generated very good machine code. A big difference between the PL/I optimizing compiler and the COBOL compilers was that to execute PL/I load modules required a license fee for the PL/I runtime (transient library). COBOL did not have a similar requirement. I ran into this when I later worked in level 2 support for CA-NETMAN, which was 80% written in PL/I. Our customers would need a license for the transient library, but would only need a license for the compiler if they additionally chose to write CA-NETMAN exits in the PL/I language. On Fri, Mar 25, 2022, 9:56 PM Jay Maynard <[email protected]> wrote: > Oh, not at all. At least in the 80s, all of the nice things were separately > charged program products, and the PL/I Optimizer was definitely in that > category. You could use the PL/I F compiler from MVT if you wanted and > could get your hands on a copy, though, at no charge. > > On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 8:32 PM Bob Bridges <[email protected]> wrote: > > > License fee? I always assumed PL/I sort of came with the OS. I didn't > > think it'd be any extra. > > > > --- > > Bob Bridges, [email protected], cell 336 382-7313 > > > > /* You've never been lost until you've been lost at Mach 3. -Paul F > > Crickmore, test pilot */ > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On Behalf > > Of CM Poncelet > > Sent: Friday, March 25, 2022 20:59 > > > > AFAIK The reason PL/I was not 'more popular' was its high license fee. > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > > -- > Jay Maynard > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
