On 2014-11-07, at 02:15, Jonathan Scott wrote: > > It is obviously necessary to ensure that any case which is already > supported by HLASM should continue to be processed in exactly the > same way for complete compatibility. > I disagree. I believe that one case in which HLASM produces an algebraically incorrect base-displacement resolution (but perhaps this should be considered not "support" but "defect") should result in "could not be resolved".
-- gil
