Interesting reading.  However, is the typical stance in mainframe land to pad 
with a x'00', or is that an improper importation from pc-land?  Probably all 
discussions should NEVER consider pc symbology or expectations, i.e., null 
padding of a string, which you illustrated in your example.  Yes, with the 
kiddies from pc-land coming in, they will expect that sort of thing, but it IS 
a bad idea to allow to flourish.  Granted, that uninitialized fields will have 
x'00' in them, but I would assume this field had been properly cleared out 
before compare, so the question of x'00' should be moot.
--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 8/3/14, ASSEMBLER-LIST automatic digest system 
<[email protected]> wrote:

 Subject: ASSEMBLER-LIST Digest - 30 Jul 2014 to 3 Aug 2014 (#2014-20)
 To: [email protected]
 Date: Sunday, August 3, 2014, 11:00 PM
 
 
 
 
 ASSEMBLER-LIST Digest - 30 Jul 2014 to 3 Aug 2014
 (#2014-20)
 
 #yiv0139025743 body {
 font-family:Arial, Helvetica,
 sans-serif;font-size:12px;color:#000000;}
 #yiv0139025743 td {
 font-family:Arial, Helvetica,
 sans-serif;font-size:12px;color:#000000;}
 #yiv0139025743 p {
 font-family:Arial, Helvetica,
 sans-serif;font-size:12px;color:#000000;}
 #yiv0139025743 a {
 font-family:Arial, Helvetica,
 sans-serif;font-size:12px;font-weight:bold;color:#3366CC;text-decoration:none;}
 #yiv0139025743 h2 {
 font-family:Arial, Helvetica,
 sans-serif;font-size:17px;font-weight:bold;color:#CC0033;}
 #yiv0139025743 h3 {
 font-family:Arial, Helvetica,
 sans-serif;font-size:16px;font-weight:bold;color:#3366CC;}
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ASSEMBLER-LIST Digest - 30 Jul 2014 to 3 Aug 2014
 (#2014-20)
 Table of contents:
 
 rationale for writing
 macros II
 
 
 rationale for writing macros
 II
 rationale for writing
 macros II (08/03)
 From: John Gilmore <[email protected]>
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Browse the ASSEMBLER-LIST
 online archives.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Reply via email to