Andrew, I don't think it would be difficult at all. Especially for ARCH 11, there's some substantial differences in that example of what code would be possible (with V5 or V6), so it will be interesting to see if the ABO takes full advantage.
Obviously there are untolled millions of possibilities for code sequences which could be optimised, but the providers of ABO are enthusiastic about its paying for itself, so there's probably something in every non-trivial program. For the possibilities, look at a program compiled with V4 vs V5 as to the instructions generated. A lot has changed, so there's the chance for ABO to change a lot. On Friday, 1 April 2016 03:57:57 UTC+1, Andrew Rowley wrote: > On 1/04/2016 11:46, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote: > > I appreciate the suggestion, but I'm not much interested in efficiency. I > > want a program that does lots of I/O and calculations to see what benefit > > we could get from ABO. > > It's an interesting exercise, but I'm not sure how useful your results > would be. I think it would be very difficult to create an artificial > program with the same opportunities (or lack of) for optimization that > you would see in production code. > > -- > Andrew Rowley > Black Hill Software > +61 413 302 386 > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
