From: multics@neroon.user.acm.cs.rpi.edu (Richard Shetron)
Subject: Re: PL/I is a viable language
Date: 26 Feb 2003 01:19:38 GMT
Date: 2003-02-26T01:19:38+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b3h4na$nro$1@newsfeeds.rpi.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: q0g6a.538999$HG.95100948@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net
In article <q0g6a.538999$HG.95100948@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>,
John W. Kennedy <jwkenne@attglobal.net> wrote:
>GerardS wrote:
>> | Glen Herrmannsfeldt wrote:
>> || robin wrote:
>> | (snip regarding the ability to find errors in programs)
>> |> PL/I tells you where the needle actually is.
>>
>> | On the 360/91 it told you where the error was near.
>>
>> PL/I had an option (for the 360/91) to identify the
>> correct PL/I statement. One method was to put an extra
>> semicolon at the end of each statement (or those
>> statements that were likely to cause an error).
>
>At the cost of slowing the 91 down to a 75. It meant issuing the
> BCR 15,0
>(flush pipeline) instruction.
>
>By the way, all this also applied to the 360/95, 360/195, and 370/195.
This was not a PL/1 problem, but a problem with the underlaying
hardware. These were early pipelined machines where an error in
the pipeline wasn't readily tracked back to actually offending
instruction. If the hardware can't report the correct program
counter for errors, the software can't do more then guess.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-02-26 1:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-02-23 1:26 PL/I is a viable language robin
2003-02-23 2:27 ` Glen Herrmannsfeldt
2003-02-23 17:58 ` GerardS
2003-02-24 3:08 ` John W. Kennedy
2003-02-26 1:19 ` Richard Shetron [this message]
2003-02-26 16:36 ` Glen Herrmannsfeldt
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox