Peephole optimization, yes, and the can vary the object code based on the 
target processor, but I have seen some truly ghastly code generated by older 
PL/I compilers for unaligned bit strings. How good is the code for unaligned 
bit strings in Enterprise PL/I.

Assembler has an advantage over compilers when the application needs to do 
things that do not map well into the source language, but even there the 
compiler might surprise you.

-- 
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל חַי
נֵ֣צַח יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל לֹ֥א יְשַׁקֵּ֖ר




________________________________________
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on behalf of 
Eric Rossman <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2025 11:09 AM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: RMODE 64 - Why?


External Message: Use Caution


I agree with this. The compiler folks work hard to generate the most efficient 
code based on the target HW. I can (usually) do slightly better than the 
compiler for small loops (where I know exactly what idiosyncrasies to take 
advantage of) but for anything more than a couple dozen HLL lines of code, the 
compiler beats me every time, even without optimizations.

With optimizations, I don't stand a chance. My take is that unless I need to 
very carefully set up for HW instructions that are not supported by the HLL 
(instructions such as those used for CPACF), it's never worth my time to do the 
work fully in assembler.

Eric Rossman
---------------------------------
ICSF Security Architect
z/OS Security
---------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On Behalf Of 
Colin Paice
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2025 9:26 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: RMODE 64 - Why?

I remember about 40 years ago, the CICS development team were very pleased with 
their work optimising the CICS dispatcher code - the key code was written in 
assembler, and polished till they could get no more benefits from tuning it.
Then came the next generation hardware, and all their polishing was of no
benefit.    They found it was best to structure their code and let the PLS
compiler optimise it - which was generally better than they could.
Colin

----------------------------------------------------------------------
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

Reply via email to