> I am not sure what purpose is served by obfuscating an ancient piece > of terminology that, for most of its life was neither contentious nor > really ambiguous.
My apologies. I was not intending to obfuscate but rather to clarify. It seems I was not successful. I posted a couple of code fragments in the context of EX+MVC vs MVCL. Two people pointed out that MVC (and EX for that matter) require a base register. My "ish" response was not intended to say "you are mistaken", it was intended to say "that is not really relevant to a discussion of the relative merits of EX+MVC and MVCL". Both MVC and MVCL use registers to locate their operands. I am aware that S-type operands (as in MVC) comprise a base register and a displacement whereas R-type operands that contain an address (as in MVCL) are not actually called "base registers". But in both cases the instructions specify (as they logically must) registers that address the data. Whether or not they are "base" registers doesn't make a difference to the relative parsimony of the code w/r/t registers used. Best regards, Steve Hobson CICS Strategy, HLASM Development, Master Inventor Hursley Laboratories, MP 189, Room A4126, UK Tie: 246894 International: +44 1962 81 6894 Je me presse de rire de tout, de peur d'être obligé d'en pleurer Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
