Best Group for COBOL Question(s)
>And so you can enjoy this, my question is, why is it that OPT(0)=20 >overrides INITCHECK, but if I ask for Optimization (e.g, OPT(1))=20 >it works? >Frankly, I do not want anyone using INITCHECK (IC) outside of=20 >OPT(0) which means NOOPT (except that you can't say that with=20 >COBOL 6.2). >Yes, INITCHECK is ONLY done by the Compiler during Parse/SCAN=20 >operations and not during code gen (as I read the manual). >But it takes more CPU for this to work, so why do that AND the=20 >CPU burn of Optimization for a compile where one is attempting to=20 >determine if fields are being referenced before they have had=20 >something put in them? INITCHECK needs to have the path analysis using the flow graphs created by the optimizer. it would not be very helpful if we did not analyze different paths to a statement, we would only find uninitialized data items that were NEVER set. INITCHECK can find data items that are initialized on smoe paths but not on others, and can be quite helpful. It does require the flow graphs that are only produced by the optimizer, (and take memory and CPU to create) so we can only provide INITHECK capability when OPT(1) or OPT(2) in effect. Cheers, TomR >> COBOL is the Language of the Future! << -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Best Group for COBOL Question(s)
> On May 30, 2018, at 9:43 AM, Steve Thompson wrote: > > > So anyone else see anything a bit silly about this? > > > Regards, > Steve Thompson Steve, IBM is in the business of making money and the more CPU you use the more computers they will sell. Ed -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Best Group for COBOL Question(s)
So this is a good place to post compiler questions. Yes COBOL Café on Developer works is also good. If you have the ability to use Q on Service link, that might be best. Tom Ross does look here occasionally. But not guaranteed Lizette > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of > Steve Thompson > Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2018 7:43 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Best Group for COBOL Question(s) > > Folks: > > I've been searching and searching, and I know that at one time there was a > COBOL List server, but I can't find it now. > > My question is, what would be the best group to ask a compiler question > (specific to COBOL) that Tom (forgot his last name), would probably see? > > IBM's blogs, community, etc are not my idea of a good time -- already got out > there and spent too much time battling through their interface. > > And so you can enjoy this, my question is, why is it that OPT(0) overrides > INITCHECK, but if I ask for Optimization (e.g, OPT(1)) it works? > > Frankly, I do not want anyone using INITCHECK (IC) outside of > OPT(0) which means NOOPT (except that you can't say that with COBOL 6.2). > > Yes, INITCHECK is ONLY done by the Compiler during Parse/SCAN operations and > not during code gen (as I read the manual). > > But it takes more CPU for this to work, so why do that AND the CPU burn of > Optimization for a compile where one is attempting to determine if fields are > being referenced before they have had something put in them? > > So anyone else see anything a bit silly about this? > > > Regards, > Steve Thompson > > -- > 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
Re: Best Group for COBOL Question(s)
Thank you. That does make sense to me. I would have done it in the "passes" for "parse/scan". But what you say makes sense to do in the "prep" for Code Gen. Of course, compiler development has changed tremendously since I was working with it back in the '70s (NOT COBOL and NOT IBM architecture stuff). Regards, Steve Thompson On 05/30/2018 11:12 AM, Allan Kielstra wrote: This list is followed pretty closely by the team so you can ask questions about COBOL here. You can also go to the COBOL Cafe (Discussion forum section) and ask questions there. There is an RFE on this topic and it has been accepted. There is no target date for that RFE. The issue is this: we implemented INITCHECK in the optimizer (not parse/scan.) That's because it has to do optimizer like things such as "Use/Def" tracking and it has to use aliases. So a word of warning: we plan to enable INITCHECK at OPT(0) but when when INITCHECK is running we still need to do some of these compute intensive operations so the OPT(0) compile will take longer. (Not as long as OPT(1) or OPT(2) but longer than OPT(0) -- 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
Re: Best Group for COBOL Question(s)
This list is followed pretty closely by the team so you can ask questions about COBOL here. You can also go to the COBOL Cafe (Discussion forum section) and ask questions there. There is an RFE on this topic and it has been accepted. There is no target date for that RFE. The issue is this: we implemented INITCHECK in the optimizer (not parse/scan.) That's because it has to do optimizer like things such as "Use/Def" tracking and it has to use aliases. So a word of warning: we plan to enable INITCHECK at OPT(0) but when when INITCHECK is running we still need to do some of these compute intensive operations so the OPT(0) compile will take longer. (Not as long as OPT(1) or OPT(2) but longer than OPT(0) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Best Group for COBOL Question(s)
There's already an RFE out for this: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rfe/execute?use_case=viewRfe_ID=114659 Andrew Arentsen Senior Mainframe Systems Engineer From: "Steve Thompson" To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 05/30/2018 09:43 AM Subject: Best Group for COBOL Question(s) Sent by:"IBM Mainframe Discussion List" Folks: I've been searching and searching, and I know that at one time there was a COBOL List server, but I can't find it now. My question is, what would be the best group to ask a compiler question (specific to COBOL) that Tom (forgot his last name), would probably see? IBM's blogs, community, etc are not my idea of a good time -- already got out there and spent too much time battling through their interface. And so you can enjoy this, my question is, why is it that OPT(0) overrides INITCHECK, but if I ask for Optimization (e.g, OPT(1)) it works? Frankly, I do not want anyone using INITCHECK (IC) outside of OPT(0) which means NOOPT (except that you can't say that with COBOL 6.2). Yes, INITCHECK is ONLY done by the Compiler during Parse/SCAN operations and not during code gen (as I read the manual). But it takes more CPU for this to work, so why do that AND the CPU burn of Optimization for a compile where one is attempting to determine if fields are being referenced before they have had something put in them? So anyone else see anything a bit silly about this? Regards, Steve Thompson -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ** This e-mail is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not disclose or use the information contained in it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please tell us immediately by return e-mail and delete the document. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Best Group for COBOL Question(s)
Folks: I've been searching and searching, and I know that at one time there was a COBOL List server, but I can't find it now. My question is, what would be the best group to ask a compiler question (specific to COBOL) that Tom (forgot his last name), would probably see? IBM's blogs, community, etc are not my idea of a good time -- already got out there and spent too much time battling through their interface. And so you can enjoy this, my question is, why is it that OPT(0) overrides INITCHECK, but if I ask for Optimization (e.g, OPT(1)) it works? Frankly, I do not want anyone using INITCHECK (IC) outside of OPT(0) which means NOOPT (except that you can't say that with COBOL 6.2). Yes, INITCHECK is ONLY done by the Compiler during Parse/SCAN operations and not during code gen (as I read the manual). But it takes more CPU for this to work, so why do that AND the CPU burn of Optimization for a compile where one is attempting to determine if fields are being referenced before they have had something put in them? So anyone else see anything a bit silly about this? Regards, Steve Thompson -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
