At 12:29 -0600 on 12/09/2011, Robert Ngan wrote about Quick test for empty stack?:
Someone is getting a S0E0 abend with interrupt code of X'34'.
My memory might be going but since X'E0' = 224 it is in the range that is supposedly reserved for USER SVCs? Thus is the existence of this ABEND Code being issued by IBM a violation of the rule that SXYY ABENDS are supposed to be associated with SVC YY and thus requiring that USER SVCs not attempt to issue any ABENDs of the form SXYY which IBM has hijacked? A USER SVC is supposed to have the ability to issue any ABEND where the YY is it's ID and X is 0-E (FXX being reserved for the SVC YY not defined ABEND)? I seem to remember other cases where IBM has hijacked ABEND codes that are supposed to belong to USER SVCs (although it just might just this one case and its various Interrupt codes). Has IBM ever published a list of USER SVC Numbers some of whose SXYY codes have been stolen in the documentation with a warning that if you use the YY number, you should not try to use the associated X modifier so as to avoid confusion with IBM's use of YOUR SXYY ABEND code.
