Re: Decades of compiler technology and what do we get?

Path	csiph.com!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border4.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news.iecc.com!nerds-end
From	Robert AH Prins <robert@prino.org>
Newsgroups	comp.compilers
Subject	Re: Decades of compiler technology and what do we get?
Date	Sun, 22 Apr 2012 22:14:12 +0000
Organization	Compilers Central
Lines	24
Sender	news@iecc.com
Approved	comp.compilers@iecc.com
Message-ID	<12-04-072@comp.compilers> (permalink)
References	<12-04-070@comp.compilers>
Reply-To	robert@prino.org
NNTP-Posting-Host	news.iecc.com
X-Trace	leila.iecc.com 1335145196 34271 64.57.183.58 (23 Apr 2012 01:39:56 GMT)
X-Complaints-To	abuse@iecc.com
NNTP-Posting-Date	Mon, 23 Apr 2012 01:39:56 +0000 (UTC)
Keywords	Cobol, performance
Posted-Date	22 Apr 2012 21:39:56 EDT
X-submission-address	compilers@iecc.com
X-moderator-address	compilers-request@iecc.com
X-FAQ-and-archives	http://compilers.iecc.com
Xref	csiph.com comp.compilers:615

Show key headers only | View raw

On 2012-04-22 18:57, Robert AH Prins wrote:
> On Apr 22, 12:58 pm, "HeyBub"<hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com>  wrote in
> bit.listserv.ibm-main:
>
> [The conventional wisdom is that COBOL programs are all I/O bound, so
> the speed of the object code is not a big deal. There are plenty of
> other compilers that can optimize this kind of stuff. -John]

As it turns out our test compiles add an OPT(0) after all programmer
supplied options "because that takes less CPU..." My comment that this
means that production programs are never the same as the ones that
have been tested was dismissed with a "We have done this for years
without anyone ever having a problem with it."

Submitting from SDSF with altered JCL does produce rather better code,
so I stand corrected (again, I'm losing it, rapidly...)

Apologies to all, at least for the z/OS part! However, I'm not going to
retract my remarks about the PL/I for Windows compiler.

Robert
--
Robert AH Prins
robert(a)prino(d)org

Back to comp.compilers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Decades of compiler technology and what do we get? Robert AH Prins <robert@prino.org> - 2012-04-22 18:57 +0000
  Re: Decades of compiler technology and what do we get? Robert AH Prins <robert@prino.org> - 2012-04-22 22:14 +0000
  Re: PL/I nostalgia, was Decades of compiler technology and what do we get? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-04-23 00:03 +0000
    Re: PL/I nostalgia "robin" <robin51@dodo.com.au> - 2012-04-25 09:07 +1000
      Re: PL/I nostalgia glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-04-24 23:52 +0000
        Re: PL/I nostalgia "robin" <robin51@dodo.com.au> - 2012-04-28 21:30 +1000
          Re: PL/I nostalgia glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-04-28 16:11 +0000
            Re: PL/I nostalgia Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com> - 2012-04-29 10:16 -0400
            Re: PL/I code "robin" <robin51@dodo.com.au> - 2012-05-05 00:45 +1000
              Re: PL/I code glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-05-05 05:20 +0000
                Re: Fortran calls, was PL/I code glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-05-06 05:13 +0000
                Re: Archaic hardware (was Fortran calls) "robin" <robin51@dodo.com.au> - 2012-05-09 10:46 +1000
          Re: PL/I nostalgia "robin" <robin51@dodo.com.au> - 2012-09-19 11:04 +1000
            Re: PL/I nostalgia glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-09-19 03:56 +0000
              Re: PL/I nostalgia "robin" <robin51@dodo.com.au> - 2012-09-21 13:53 +1000
                Re: PL/I nostalgia glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-09-21 07:00 +0000
                Re: PL/I nostalgia "robin" <robin51@dodo.com.au> - 2012-09-30 10:45 +1000

csiph-web