Dave Gibney Information Technology Services Washington State University
> -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin > Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 1:33 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: rexx cpu intensive > > On Wed, 21 Mar 2012 19:53:34 +0000, Gibney, Dave wrote: > > > I once greatly improved a Rexx routine exploiting the associative Rexx > array. It was some extract from a TMS report. It was originally written like > any > other array with a subscript variable. And a lot of for loops. > > I changed it to use the main key (in this case the tape volser) as the > > index. > Elapsed and CPU times where reduced 80 to 90 percent. > > > Yes, but one must sometimes contend with readers of these > lists who insist that Rexx compound tails _must_ be consecutive > positive integers, and the count _must_ appear in the .0 member, > because that's the way the only example they read did it. > Much of my growth in this field has been slow and steady. The Rexx associative array realization is one of the "aha moments" I still remember. What I'd really like (is it there and I don't know?) is a: for "each" stem_var. say "each" if each = .... other_stem.each = 'foo' etc. Dave Gibney Information Technology Services Washington State University > -- gil > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
