> And for some other topic: as mentioned earlier, PL/1 "close to the hardware" is
> complete nonsense. I did much benchmarking in the past with PL/1 and C/370, and
> I found that C/370 performs very well (better than PL/1), and I don't see any
> performance problems with C on the mainframe. It depends on the quality of the
> compiler, and I think, the GNU compiler will generate very fast code on the
> mainframe also, cause most optimization is done before the code generation
> steps. If there were problems, you simply would have to do some work in the
> code generation for the mainframe. But that's all. It could easily be done.
C will look good compared to PL/I if for no other reason than:
C combines the power of assembler language
with the ease of use of assembler language.
If you've studied any of the PDP-11's instruction set, C looks like
some kind of macro-assembler for it.
So given a reasonable compiler C will tend to look good since the
base language is pretty low.
The weakness comes in addressing "records" in a file since a
"record" is a slippery concept w/i Unix- Unlike VM, VSE or MVS.
--
John R. Campbell Speaker to Machines [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- As a SysAdmin, yes, I CAN read your e-mail, but I DON'T get that bored!
Disclaimer: All opinions expressed above are those of John R. Campbell
alone and are seriously unlikely to reflect the opinions of
his employer(s) or lackeys thereof. Anyone who says
differently is itching for a fight!
