Hi, Dan,
I hope all continues well with you. Has retirement kept you busy?
We hope to see Howard in late June, if he ever answers his emails!
Could you send me the powerpoint for this presentation. I have the pdf,
but i always appreciated the powerpoint.
Regards, Gary
On 2018-05-28 2:44
On Mon, 28 May 2018 17:06:14 -0700, Ed Jaffe wrote:
>might I respectfully suggest BASSM/BSM
>linkage be used instead of BASR/BR?
Good advice, IMO. And note that the linkage information provided by BALR
and BASR is such that it is safe to use BSM when returning to a calling
program that used one
In defense of BAKR/PR, please note that while it is a pig (relatively) it
is a very useful pig. As mentioned before, in most cases the extra
overhead likely won't matter much. We use it in a pretty big code-base
that wanders through every mode swing you can think of. It's very useful
that when y
Hi Dan,
I'm with Gary... would love a copy of your presentation.
Thanks,
Russ
Russell W. Teubner
HostBridge Technology: www.hostbridge.com
www.linkedin.com/in/rteubner
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List On
Behalf Of Gary Weinhold
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2018 7:11 AM
T
One way to find out whether you need those save is to use a linkage that
doesn't save them and get a call at 0 dark hundred when things blow up. Unless
you know that you don't need to save them, play safe. IMHO.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
_
*Any* choice of linkage conventions imposes a dependency between the caller and
the callee.
BTW, this is an example of why I prefer to encapsulate such things in macros.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Assemb
A quick test of performance shows that BAKR/PR is about 14 times as expensive
as STM/LM.
I would say that in in initialization/termination code using BAKR/PR isn't
going to hurt you, but I would totally avoid it in record level code.
Chris Blaicher
Technical Architect
Mainframe Development
P: 2
On 29/05/18 19:12, Christopher Y. Blaicher wrote:
A quick test of performance shows that BAKR/PR is about 14 times as
expensive as STM/LM.
I would say that in in initialization/termination code using BAKR/PR
isn't going to hurt you, but I would totally avoid it in record level
code.
How expens
A fairer comparison would be BAKR/PR versus *all* of the code they replace,
including allocating and freeing the save area.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List on behalf
of Christopher Y. Blaicher
Generally, in my code I save the registers in the caller's savearea, then
allocate a combined SAVEAREA/WORKAREA that I leave R13 pointing at. If one
used BAKR/PR and didn't need any working storage, then your comparison would be
valid and cheaper, but if you still need working storage, then BAK
10 matches
Mail list logo