>Whatever became of efficiency. >Years ago Bell Labs Management required all application programming be done in >BAL.
The myth that BAL is more efficient, is (in general) just that, a myth. COBOL, with optimisation, is almost as efficient, and easier to maintain. People costs are more than coding costs. In a z/OS environment, with access methods, online sub-systems, utilities, and the like, less than 5% of the code running on the z/Box is user-written. Complaining about the efficiency of BAL (or HLASM) is false economy. Write assembler where required; allow the technician to use whatever tools they are comfortable with for the rest. IT is to improve the efficiency of people, NOT the reverse. - Too busy driving to stop for gas! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
