Well, the runs counter to the many sites that moved their applications to PL/1, including State Farm (who trained 1,500 non-programmers to use PL/1 in a 9 week course - those with musical ability, mathematical degrees, or knowledge of two or more languages accounted for 90% of the folks who were retained after that class!). We benchmarked SAS, PL/1, and ASM programs in about 1973, and saw ASM's execution was faster than PL/1, which was only slightly faster than SAS, but the writing of the ASM program took 7 units of time, the PL/1 took 4 units of time, and SAS took 1 unit of time.
Barry -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Scott Ford Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 2:31 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: AutoCoder Barry, My experience with PL/1 wasnt so good. In the 70's and 80's it was pretty CPU intensive, i was on a 370/158 OS/VS2/HASP ...then later VSE on a 4381 , PL/1 probably is much better with the faster machines. Sent from my iPad Scott Ford Senior Systems Engineer www.identityforge.com On Jan 17, 2012, at 3:18 PM, Barry Merrill <[email protected]> wrote: > State Farm, in 1973, was completely dependent on AUTOCODER which was > then running on 360/30s and 360/40s in the 25 regional offices, while > the new "Real Time" replacement application was still being created > (in PL/1). When the "Real Time" system ultimately failed, the next > iteration was called "DELTA" as in "Drop Everything, Let's Try Again). > > Those AUTOCODER compiles required very long run times and were CPU > hogs on the home office 360/165 machines, so a team was assembled to > rewrite the compiler in PL/1. > The end result was a massive reduction in the compile time. > But the team found on instance in which the IBM compiler generated > incorrect code, and were going to fix that IBM error, but management > decided the team should generate the exact same code as the IBM > compiler, so they implemented their compiler to generate that same error. > > I was NOT a part of this team, but I think that at least one of that > team is a semi-frequent poster to this forum. > > Barry Merrill > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) > Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 9:12 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: IBM researchers make 12-atom magnetic memory bit > > In <[email protected]>, on 01/16/2012 > at 09:30 PM, Scott Ford <[email protected]> said: > >> Knew a guy 15 yrs a go made a lot of money still writing auto coder >> .... > > I might believe AUTOCODER. Would that be 1401, 1410, 7070[1] or 7080 > AUTOCODER? > > [1] By far the most sophisticated of the lot. > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT > ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html> > We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. > (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
