Computer Science

Fri Mar 15 16:44:10 EST 2002

Yes MVS/370 and of course now it's been the 3090 series for awhile.  I
can'treally be specific about details but when some funcitons of some very
critical software were re-written from ALC to C, performance detreriorated
so drastically that they had to abandon the project until pieces of the
compiler were re-written and I still don't think that the C Code  ever
performed comparably.

On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 jwantz at hpcc2.hpcc.noaa.gov wrote:

> Hey Amanda,
> I guess you are talking MVS.  I never had the dubious pleasure of
> working on MVS but the old NWS super computers Cyber (370 clones) ran MVS.
> and I knew a lot
> of people who used the Cybers all of the time.  I understand that their C
> compiler was really bad!On Fri, 15
>
>     Jim
>
> Mar 2002, Amanda Lee wrote:
>
> > Yes but you left out the CPU and Platform issues.  I can tell you that C
> > does not run very efficiently on an IBM Mainframe for example yet IBM 370
> > Assembler obviously does and this is because the Assembler Language is
> > designed to work with the archetecture.  I know of instances where certain
> > Function
> >  Calls in C really bogs down an application.  So you are correct to say
> > that the actual raw code itself may run comparably to Assembler, but not
> > every compiler is designed to produce efficient object code nor code which
> > works well with the particular CPU on the  respective Platform.
> >
> > Amanda Lee
> >
> >  On Fri, 15
> > Mar 2002
> > jwantz at hpcc2.hpcc.noaa.gov wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Amanda,
> > > I agree with you--all but one comment.  C at it was originally conceived
> > > was not very efficient.  However, with modern optimization techniques it
> > > is sometimes possible to have a C program that is more efficient then
> > > typical hand written assembly code.  The problem with this type of
> > > optimization is that it takes a very long time to compile even on a fast
> > > machine.  And no, I have never been able to write a "hello world
> > > program" in C under DOS that can compete with my assembly version.
> > > hello.c compiled is still more than 4000 bytes (I've gotten less under
> > > Linux) and hello.asm produced a hello.com of 36 bytes.  So I guess what
> > > I'm saying is that I only partially disagree.
> > >
> > >       Take Care,
> > >      Jim
> > > On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Amanda
> > > Lee wrote:
> > >
> > > > At least you were taught the more difficult and, in the case of Assembler
> > > > Language, more efficient.  C is not really an efficient language because
> > > > it carries with it a lt of overhead.  However, as compared with Visual C,
> > > > Visual Basic, JAVA, Oracle, Access and others, C is preferable.
> > > >
> > > > I have over 25 years experience in  Software Development and maintenance.
> > > > I have coded in a few different languages on various platforms except
> > > > Unix/Linux which is where I'm a newbie these days.  I guess my fun time
> > > > was when I programmed Assembler Language applications on IBM Mainframes
> > > > for about 9 years.
> > > > The trend is to place too much emphasis upon what I call code in a box.
> > > > There's a lot of utility in this but it doesn't work as a onesize fits all
> > > > and sooner or later, if the developers involved don't know what really
> > > > comprises the inside of that boxful of code, then this is how applications
> > > > are literally thrown away and this becomes very costly.
> > > >
> > > > I believe Victor, that in the longrun, what you have studied will give you
> > > > the edge.
> > > >
> > > > Amanda Lee
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Victor Tsaran wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Amanda, you are right. I met a lot of so-called "hard coders" during my
> > > > > studies at the university who thought that they could do everything.I
> > > > > graduated just a year ago and at my university, Temple University in Philly,
> > > > > Visual C++ was only a small fraction of the program. Mostly C, Assembly and
> > > > > C++, but on Unix and VMS. We were given a chance to try Visual C on Win NT
> > > > > platform, but only for comparison purposes. Now I think Java is overtaking
> > > > > slowly.
> > > > > Vic
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "Amanda Lee" <amanda at shellworld.net>
> > > > > To: <speakup at braille.uwo.ca>
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 3:36 PM
> > > > > Subject: Re: Computer Science
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Nope, Unix, Mainframes aren't standard anymore.  The college grads we get
> > > > > > these days at Verizon have no clue what Unix or Mainframes are all about.
> > > > > > Everything is taught on a Windows-based Platform.  I believe JAVA is
> > > > > > taught, probably Visual Basic, Maybe sometimes C Language but usually C
> > > > > > Plus Plus which was actually abandoned in the project I work on for
> > > > > > straight C Language.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I would think in the future though, there will be a change back to at
> > > > > > least teaching Linux since it can run on a less expensive platform.  It's
> > > > > > pretty disgraceful how the content of Computer Sciences education has been
> > > > > > degraded and these kids coming out have an ego bigger than life and think
> > > > > > they can take on the World in a day!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > They really struggle when they can't understand how to program and the
> > > > > > quality of code coming out is pretty awful.  There is even this mentality
> > > > > > in the Corporate World which indicates that one can learn everything they
> > > > > > need to on the job and yet they can't figure out why  there are so many
> > > > > > problems with efficiency and the costs resulting from poor efficiency.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Amanda Lee
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 jwantz at hpcc2.hpcc.noaa.gov wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Chris,
> > > > > > > I'm not going to get involved in the "bookshare wars', but since you
> > > > > were
> > > > > > > chastizing others on this list because most people use WINDOWS and not
> > > > > > > linux, I think its only fair to point out that your computer science
> > > > > > > department is very nonstandard.  Though I am a meteorologist, not a
> > > > > > > computer science person, I know many computer science students in the
> > > > > past
> > > > > > > and the present.  Teaching WINDOWS programming is very nonstandard.  I
> > > > > > > would guess that at least 90 percent of the schools teach programming on
> > > > > a
> > > > > > > UNIX variant of some kind.  In the past thre was a fair amount of people
> > > > > > > using VMS.  However, a lot of beginning C and C++ classes did use
> > > > > > > Turbo/Borland.  WINDOWS programming is much more difficult than UNIX
> > > > > > > programming, so I suppose you are to be congratulated for making it
> > > > > > > through such a tough curriculum.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >      Jim Wantz
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>