And that's the point...
SR 14,14
BR 15
is easier and clearer than machine language, but
main {}
is (sorta) clearer than that.
sas
p.s. bonus points if you see what I did there ;-)
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 9:19 AM, John Eells <ee...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Ed Jaffe wrote:
>
>> On 7/11/2018 4:04 PM, Pew, Curtis G wrote:
>>
>>> I don’t think it’s true that JCL is the worst programming language (with
>>> all due respect to Fred Brooks) because it isn’t really a programming
>>> language. Should it have been a programming language? Almost certainly, as
>>> shown by Unix scripting languages. But it isn’t...
>>>
>>
>> With all due respect to whomever deserves it, ANY instructions telling
>> the computer what to do constitute programming...
>>
>>
> This opens up the "competition for the race to the bottom" to machine
> language, which is clearly the "winner" here! Even 1BFF07FE is harder to
> read and code than its 2-instruction assembler counterpart.
>
> (OK, so I could not resist. Back into my hole now.)
>
> --
> John Eells
> IBM Poughkeepsie
> ee...@us.ibm.com
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
--
sas
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
