Important tip! If you want to enable the extended runtime (the MVS stuff)
with ibm-clang you must explicitly define _EXT using  -D_EXT. I just
learned that over on Discord. It's buried away in the migration guide. It
was the default for the XLC compilers.

On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 5:06 AM Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> wrote:

> Trying to hold down the noise by doing one reply for all of your great
> suggestions.
>
> @Peter, no, did not know about .pch. The documentation is sorely lacking.
> Would like to give that a try but no idea how.
> > Did you run both of those tests using the same REGION value on the same
> LPAR?
> Same exact virtual machine on both but I am not certain about the REGION
> size. Suspect it was the same. I will look when I get back online and
> possibly re-test.
>
> @David Crayford, agree, this product does not seem quite yet ready for
> prime time. Sadly. I had hoped to move forward with the new compiler.
>
> @David Cole, well, both compile and run times are important. If you pay
> for compile cycles, as we do, then compile CPU time is important. If you
> value developer time, then compile elapsed time is important. Of course run
> time is important, but harder to measure: what inputs, on what machine?
>
> @Allen: noted. I will re-run the tests with larger and consistent region
> sizes. I suspect they were the same, but I am not online at the moment.
>
> Also not sure what the OPT value was for the Open compiler test. I did not
> specify, and the default does not seem to be documented :-( OPT value was 0
> for the legacy test. When I retest I will specify OPT 0.
>
> Charles
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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

Reply via email to