ER2, the majority are concerned with eonsistency in the NEATERPAR:\IS, if NEATER2 has changed the requosted formatting because of inconsistencies, thn changed format settings are indicated in the numeric output after the error eode. If a parameter is not recognized, the unrecognized portion of the parameter string is reproduced to assist the user in making his correction. About 10 distinct error messages are produced w Inch serve to pinpoint logic errors in the source deck.
Performance NotesWe have already remarked that NEATER2 processes a PL/I source deck at 3 to 6 times the speed that the compiler does. This performance was attained by careful choice of PL/I source statements so as to maximize the in-line execution of the compiled program and then to minimize the size and execution time of the compiled program. The source program is long (ca. 1500 statements), but the compiled coding from each statement is typically short as a result of constant revision to optimally tune the program to version 5 of the PL/I compiler. The program gives best results with REORDER specified, and with compilation with OPT = 02. The program CSECT is about 22K bytes; the load module about 39K bytes, and the storage area about 18K bytes; so the whole of NEAT-ER2 should run easily in a 60K byte partition.lost modes of operation of NEATER2 make relatively minor changes in the speed at which it (or, subsequently, the compiler) processes a source deck; so they may be used freely at very little expense. The compiler does process a compressed source deck slightly more rapidly than it processes a logically formatted deck. When USAGE is on, an extensive apparatus to gather usage information is constructed, and marked performance degradation is observed. NEATER2 is slowed about 25 percent, the compiler about 20 percent, and execution about 40 percent when this option is employed.A new method of hash coding is presented and is shown to possess desirable attributes. Specifically, the algorithm is simple, efficient, and exhaustive, while needing little time per probe ond using few probes per lookup. Performance dato and implementation hints are also given.