🚀 go-pugleaf

>In article <1991Apr16.161743.494@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu> dave@visual1.jhuapl.edu
>        (Dave Weintraub) writes:
>   In article <1991Apr16.004355.22971@redsox.bsw.com>, campbell@redsox.bsw.com
>        (Larry Campbell) writes:
>   |> Why is it (he wonders out loud) that the only machines on which people
>        still
>   |> (in this day and age) seem to use assembly language are IBM 360s?
>
>>   The problem is that there are times when Assembler is the best choice:
>>
>>  [ reasons deleted ]
>>
>
>The most important reason:
>
>Programming in 370 Assembly is FUN!
>
>Doug.
>--

Here's some more:

Other operating systems (i.e. UNIX) were designed so that folks could
interface to it in C.  IBM 3*0 operatings systems were designed so that
normal folks couldn't talk to it in a high-level language at all.

Consider MVS.  Two of the most important data access formats are PDS's
and VSAM.  One is thoroughly supported by TSO and ISPF, but you can't
program to it in any HLL worth a damn.  The other is programmable from
high-level languages up the wazoo, but no TSO/ISPF interfaces will
touch it.  With this kind of bizarre attitude about its own data, how
can you expect IBM to spawn anything but proficient assembler coders?
Even access to the basic components of the user interface (TSO) are
available only from assembler.

Also, there hasn't been a generally available decent C compiler on
IBM/3*0 up till now.  (Maybe C/370 V2 will change that, especially
with its new no-run-time-library optuon.)

  - Batchman