[Info-vax] Hard links on VMS ODS5 disks

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 7/19/2023 12:03 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
> On 7/18/2023 10:01 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 7/18/2023 9:25 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
>>> On 7/18/2023 8:47 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>> On 7/18/2023 8:34 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
>>>>> On 7/18/2023 1:13 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>>>> I am pretty sure that if VMS kernel had most Macro-32 and
>>>>>> Bliss code rewritten to C, then VMS kernel would be
>>>>>> smaller than just systemd. :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> I have to wonder why you think re-writing in C would be "smaller" 
>>>>> (whatever
>>>>> that is) than what's there today?
>>>>
>>>> Same functionality implemented in different languages
>>>> result in a different number of lines of code.
>>>
>>> So, you're talking about source files?
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>>> Do you also claim that the executable code would also be smaller?
>>
>> No.
> 
> Then, what would be the benefit?

I am not talking about benefits.

I am talking about how to compare complexity (functionality)
of software written in different languages.

X1 lines of C can be more complex than X2 lines of Macro-32
even though X1 < X2. Because if the Macro-32 was
rewritten to X3 lines of C then it could happen that X3 < X1.

> For example:
> 
>          Stat% = SYS$QIOW(       ,                       !  Event flag &
>                                  Ch% By Value,           !  VMS channel &
>                                  IO$_ACPCONTROL By Value,!  Operation &
>                                  IOSB::Stat%,            !  I/O status 
> block &
>                                  ,                       !  AST routine &
>                                  ,                       !  AST parameter &
>                                  Temp% By Desc,          !  P1 sub-func 
> code &
>                                  URL$,                   !  P2 URL string &
>                                  RetLen%,                !  P3-return len &
>                                  IP$,                    !  P4-output 
> string &
>                                  ,                       !  P5 &
>                                  )                       !  P6
> 
> The above is rather easy to understand, from some perspectives.  Would 
> it be "smaller" if strung out on one line?  Sure.  Would it be a bit 
> harder to understand?  Most definitely.  Prone to mistakes also.
> 
> Compilers, assemblers, and such ignore the "white space", so it really 
> doesn't matter to the executable.  However, the white space and comments 
> can make code easier to understand, and avoid mistakes.

The issue is well known.

Ideally the measurement should be SLOC which is counting "statements",
which is independent of formatting.

But it is easier to count plain LOC.

And the assumption is that when looking at millions of lines
of code by thousands of different developers, then SLOC is
proportional to LOC.

> So, what's the issue with larger source files?

The point was comparison of functionality.

Re the simple vs complex point.

Arne