PL/I - still my favorite - since 15 years with 'C' and other obscure languages..
http://www.uni-muenster.de/ZIV/Mitarbeiter/EberhardSturm/PL1andC.html ps. acually PL/I was defined by Vienna Definition Language ( or something like that - failing memory.. ) to match the hardware and (IMHO) looks better - how do you use pseudo registers in "C" ?? And how do you define "task" for "C" procedure ?? have a nice day - tuomo ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2002 6:50 PM Subject: Re: LinuxWorld Article series > > 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! >
