The easy one is the LPD/MVCOS comparison.  It has more to do with the function 
of the instruction than the format of the instruction.

LPD, or LOAD PAIR DISJOINT, if you think about it and say it in English is LOAD 
a register pair from location A and location B
MVCOS said in English is Move to location A from location B for a length in the 
register

These are consistent with other LOAD or MOVE instructions, so I think their 
goal was consistency in the format of the function, rather than consistency 
with the instruction hardware format.

I don't have any personal knowledge about this, but as an outsider, that is my 
take on it.

Chris Blaicher
Principal Software Engineer, Software Development
Syncsort Incorporated
50 Tice Boulevard, Woodcliff Lake, NJ 07677
P: 201-930-8260  |  M: 512-627-3803    
E: [email protected]

-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:[email protected]] On 
Behalf Of Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 4:45 PM
To: MVS List Server 2
Subject: HLASM operand order vs. instruction operand order

I guess this question is mostly for John Ehrman, but others may have insight as 
well.

For the same machine instruction format, there are sometimes two different 
HLASM operand orders used for the operands of instructions.  For example, LOC 
has HLASM operands in order 1,2,3 while STMCH operands are in order 1,3,2 and 
the machine instruction operands are in order 1,3,2:

LOC          R1,D2(B2),M3                 [RSY-b]
'EB'   R1   M3   B2   DL2   DH2   'F2'
0     8    12     16    20     32       40     47

STCMH    R1,M3,D2(B2)                [RSY-b]
'EB'   R1   M3   B2   DL2  DH2   '2D'
0     8    12     16    20     32      40     47

Here is a second example, LPD has HLASM order 3,1,2 while MVCOS has HLASM order 
1,2,3 and the machine operands are in order 3,1,2:

LPD            R3,D1(B1),D2(B2)       [SSF]
'C8'  R3   '4'    B1   D1   B2   D2
0    8    12    16   20    32   36   47

MVCOS     D1(B1),D2(B2),R3       [SSF]
'C8'  R3   '0'   B1  D1   B2  D2
0    8    12   16   20   32   36   47

Am I the only one to whom the inconsistency seems arbitrary?  Or am I missing 
some salient characteristic that explains the differences?

Peter
--




This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee 
and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader 
of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any 
attachments from your system.

Reply via email to