"IBM Mainframe Assembler List" <[email protected]> wrote on
06/16/2022 10:36:12 AM:
> Or it could be that whatever version of COBOL was used then (OS/VS
> COBOL or earlier) was more efficient with signed binary, such as due
> to the choices it made in instruction selection.
My understanding, at least for VSE, is that COBOL does not really
support unsigned numbers. Instead, if the S designation is not coded then
COBOL simply forces a positive number. Thus, in the case of binary,
specifying 9(4) or S9(4) still has a max possible value of 32,767 either
way. Therefore, the only benefit of using an unsigned PIC is to prevent
negative numbers. Otherwise, yes, you do save a little on performance by
using the S designation so that COBOL doesn't have to go to the extra
effort of forcing a positive sign.
Sincerely,
Dave Clark
--
int.ext: 91078
direct: (937) 531-6378
home: (937) 751-3300
Winsupply Group Services
3110 Kettering Boulevard
Dayton, Ohio 45439 USA
(937) 294-5331
*********************************************************************************************
This email message and any attachments is for use only by the named
addressee(s) and may contain confidential, privileged and/or proprietary
information. If you have received this message in error, please
immediately notify the sender and delete and destroy the message and all
copies. All unauthorized direct or indirect use or disclosure of this
message is strictly prohibited. No right to confidentiality or privilege
is waived or lost by any error in transmission.
*********************************************************************************************
