On Tue, 12 Jun 2012 15:53:26 -0500, McKown, John wrote: >For LE enabled assembler (I have written some), when I >use a base register at all (not often any more),
I think that you try too hard to eliminate the use of base registers. They are still needed for data. >you can avoid the use of a "base register" for code in >almost every case by using relative instructions... Right. The exception is for an indexed branch. >use LARL instead of LA for areas in the CSECT That's fine for code or anything else that is (at least) halfword aligned. >use LHI if possible. Agreed. Also AHI, etc. >For a constant which does not fit into a halfword, or >maybe is packed decimal or characters, you can replace >somethin like: L R7,FULLWORD with 2 instructions: >LARL R7,FULLWORD followed by L R7,0(,R7), and the same >with packed and characters. OK, that is a bit ugly, I admit. Yes, it is ugly. And unnecessary unless you are trying to eliminate all base registers. That's why I don't like the term "baseless code". -- Tom Marchant
