RE: Common back ends, AFAIK they do not. COBOL V5/6 use a Java back end (deponent knoweth not which one), C has its own (and the C back end was a candidate for the COBOL V5/6 back end but lost the race, or so I have been told by people who should know), and I don't know which one PL/1 uses these days.
Peter -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Seymour J Metz Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2019 5:35 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Unreadable code (Was: Concurrent Server Task Dispatch issue multitasking issue) There have been compilers for more than half a century that produced better code for complex instructions than most programmers. Further, what is optimal for one processor might be slow on another. So best practice for assembler is to code for readability and maintainability, document well, and encapsulate any tricky optimization of frequently used functions in centralized macros, again well documented. Don't C, COBOL and PL/I all use the same compiler back end these days? -- This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your system. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
