I think it is the new instructions that don't use base or index registers, instead a +/- 32K offset.
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Jim Mulder <d10j...@us.ibm.com> wrote: >> No, I was saying, I thought, something very different. To be clear, >> the execution of an AMODE(64) routine using the instructions natural >> to it, is in general faster than the execution of anits AMODE(31) or, >> a fortiori, AMODE(24) functional equivalent. > > AMODE does not affect performance. Can you explain > which instructions you think are faster than some > functional equivalent, and why you think they are faster? > > Jim Mulder z/OS System Test IBM Corp. Poughkeepsie, NY > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
