Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!uunet!lll-winken!sun-barr!newstop!sun!amdahl!terry From: terry@uts.amdahl.com (Lewis T. Flynn) Newsgroups: comp.lang.rexx Subject: Re: Rexx compiler(s) Message-ID: Date: 22 Aug 90 16:43:55 GMT References: <90230.092947BOYDJ@QUCDN.BITNET> Reply-To: terry@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com (Lewis T. Flynn) Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA Lines: 19 In article <90230.092947BOYDJ@QUCDN.BITNET> BOYDJ@QUCDN.QueensU.CA (Jeff Boyd) writes: > >What is the current state of the world with respect to Rexx >compilers ? Any good ones out there ? Bad ones ? I program >on a VM/CMS machine, but I'm also curious about other operating >systems. Personal REXX from Mansfield (for MS/DOS) has an interesting half way approach to this. Their implementation (and others, I assume) normally does a compile and go on your input. They give you the option to compile the program and save it on the end of your source (after the ^z) which can be a fair sized savings. The problem with this over a normal compiler is that a compile and go process must have a fast compiler and doesn't produce very fast output. Disclaimer: I think this is accurate, but I'm repeating from sometimes faulty memory. If I'm wrong, what do I know. Terry