Expensive op codes

["Peter Dow" <pcdow@xxxxxxxxx>]

> Barbara Morris wrote:

> With date operations, the contest should be regarding the number of date
> opcodes, not the number of statements.  (Date opcodes are very expensive.)

> Hans Bold wrote:
> Ah, another FAQ!  A long time ago, I did a comparison
> comparing the performance of the old MULT 100.0001 trick.
> I found that using MULT was about 100 to 150 times slower
> than doing the date conversion using a couple of moves.

I'd be very interested in a discussion of just how "expensive" various
opcodes are and how much of a difference it makes in a typical business
application. In these days of relatively inexpensive fast hardware, my rule
of thumb has been to spend more time optimizing I/O than worrying about how
many MULT, ADDDUR, etc. op codes I  use. I tend to prefer solutions that
require fewer source statements unless there is solid evidence that it will
noticeably impact performance.

Which is faster, ADD 1 X or EVAL X=X+1?  READE or READ then IF
key='constant'? Is there a list of FAQ's about this?

Peter Dow
Dow Software Services, Inc.
909 425-0194 voice/fax

> +---
> | This is the RPG/400 Mailing List!
> | To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com.
> | To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com.
> | To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
> | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator:
david@midrange.com
> +---


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com

+---
| This is the RPG/400 Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---