On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 17:58:47 -0400, Steve Smith wrote:

>Bill's suggestion is a vast improvement.  But I can't understand why IBM
>publishes examples that seem to be written (by a student) for System/360.
>Not to mention that actually dividing by 2 was naive even then.
> 
That's what I was thinking.

>Convert the code to use this new thing, 64-bit registers, and you'll need
>half the instructions and none of the silly games.
>
But ETOD is now 128 bits.  Still, isn't a 128-bit dividend supported.  Remainder
is usually inconsequential.

-- gil

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to