On 28/2/23 20:41, René Jansen wrote:
Depending on what you test and what you want to see of course. You did use the
Rexx compiler?
My tests are quite straightforward. I take a 12,000 cylinder SMF
sequential file and read it using different programming languages and
then compare the timing results.
René.
On 28 Feb 2023, at 06:47, David Crayford <dcrayf...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 25/2/23 01:23, Farley, Peter wrote:
Python on the mainframe is pretty good, but still can't beat out Rexx in
performance even when the Rex script needs to use BPXWUNIX and friends to
access z/OS Unix file systems,
I have conducted a series of benchtests, and the results suggest that REXX is
not as fast as Python. In my testing, I compare the performance of C, Lua,
Python, and REXX, and the results are clear: C is the fastest, followed by Lua,
which is within an order of magnitude of C. Python comes next, within an order
of magnitude of Lua, and REXX consistently performs the poorest. In addition to
the performance factor, the vast Python ecosystem compared to the limited
options available for REXX also make it an easy decision. Python is also
simpler to extend with packages, while REXX requires more effort and
potentially complex steps, such as using modern libraries that require Language
Environment (LE).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
