[Info-vax] Hard links on VMS ODS5 disks

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 7/19/2023 1:32 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2023-07-19, Dave Froble <davef at tsoft-inc.com> wrote:
>> On 7/18/2023 10:01 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> On 7/18/2023 9:25 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
>>>> Do you also claim that the executable code would also be smaller?
>>>
>>> No.
>>
>> Then, what would be the benefit?
> 
> For one thing, if you didn't have to worry about the Macro-32 and
> Bliss crap, the VMS port would have been completed years ago.

Are you sure?

It is not my impression that the various VMS ISA migrations has
caused rewrite of lots of Macro-32 and Bliss.

My impression is that:
- they create the Macro-32 and Bliss compilers for the new platform
- they compile the old Macro-32 and Bliss code dating back from the
   70's and 80's
- the new code get written in C (plus a little bit of native
   assembler where needed)

> It's also a hell of a lot easier, quicker, and more robust, to
> write something in C than it is in Macro-32 or Bliss.

I think they do write the new stuff in C.

Obviously if they have a need to read and understand some
code then reading C will be something like a factor 10
faster than reading Macro-32.

> It's not the larger source files. It's the very painful architecture
> specific coding and lower levels of abstraction that Macro-32 and Bliss
> bring to the table.

They are not architecture specific as as the same code
run on many platforms.

But Bliss is low level and Macro-32 is very low level. The same
Macro-32 code does not become high level just because it goes through
a compiler instead of an assembler.

Arne