Presumptuously, I have verified that what John Ehrman says about the use of
SECTALIGN(16) is entirely correct. (I use this value routinely for my
AMODE(64) code, and I had not been aware of this dependency.) I am
nevertheless left unhappy. A reader of the discussion of CNOP in the LR could
be forgiven for coming away from it supposing that CNOP supports quadword
alignment unconditionally, and there are even more egregious offenses elsewhere
in the LR.
For example, the text
| LQ | quadword | [DC LQ'0.1'] | quadword |
in which both implicit alignment and alignment are specified as quadword in the
table on page 129 of the current HLASM 1.6 LR is, I think, misleading. [Note
that the bracketed material actually appears, improperly, in the line above
this one.]
John Gilmore Ashland, MA 01721-1817 USA
