Timothy, I agree with everything so far. As a real Rexx person on Rexx VM in the 80s I would also like see all items discussed here, noticeably performance, better storage management, more C like functions.
I also use Oorexx and love it , especially on Linux. A common gui API for rexx or Oorexx or both would be great. Easily callable Rexx from HLL, like COBOL .. Regards, Scott z/OS Dev Idmworks On Oct 29, 2017, 1:48 AM -0400, Timothy Sipples <[email protected]>, wrote: > David Crayford wrote: > > REXX performance is terrible. > > OK, now we're starting to get somewhere! > > > It's used extensively on z/OS, a platform where CPU > > consumption costs big bucks. > > 1. Start with REXX compilation. > > 2. How much is "extensively"? What is your resource consumption > attributable to compiled REXX at monthly peak? Let's suppose that number, > reasonably carefully determined, is "X" MSUs, "P" percent of your total > peak MSUs. > > 3. How do "X" (and "P") change, including zIIP effects, if the compiled > REXX code that is capable/compatible runs instead via NetRexx with the > latest JVM? > > 4. For the remaining compiled REXX code that is not capable of running via > NetRexx, how much could "X" (and "P") be feasibly reduced if there were an > improved compiler (JIT or otherwise)? > > Let's quantify this. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Timothy Sipples > IT Architect Executive, Industry Solutions, IBM z Systems, AP/GCG/MEA > E-Mail: [email protected] > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
