Re: Code generated by various tests was Re: Prodcuing an output file only on Friday?

This is a belated response to a previous posting and I am concerned
about some of the code generated.  If I were the systems programmer, I
would be reporting a defect.  My comments are interspersed below.

On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 14:40:10 -0300, Clark Morris <cfmtech@istar.ca>
wrote:

>On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 13:16:24 +0000 (UTC), docdwarf@panix.com () wrote:
> 

If your shop is afflicted with CSP - Cross System Product, Visual Gen
or possibly some other 4th generation packages which force F zones on
positive numbers I strenuously recommend NUMPROC(MIG).  This still has
relatively efficient sign handling but doesn't give certain nasty
results. 

The loads probably are irrelevant to the question and for
addressability only. 

Here I would expect a PACK, CP (compare packed) generation since
negative zero is theoretically possible.  If I were the systems
programmer at the shop I would APAR the code. 
Same comment as above. 

In this and the following a LOAD, LTR combination might be faster
although in 99 percent of the cases no one would notice the
difference.  As I recall twos complement, I don't think there can be a
negative binary zero. 

Here I would expect a CP and APAR the code if in charge.  Negative
zero is possible as is an F zone if the file was messed with by Visual
Gen (previously known as CSP).