On 2017-03-01, at 13:24, Steve Smith wrote: > ASMA320W is imho, a total wimp-out on IBM's behalf. There'd be less > confusion if this was flagged as an *error*, which it is. It may sometimes > generate what the user wants, but the user didn't specify it correctly. > > And the case where the assembler issues this for BR instructions is > egregiously wrong. > Should/does HLASM require that the target of BR is within the owning CSECT?
Grrr... It's a shame that the length attribute of a CSECT isn't the length of the CSECT. (Same for LOCTR?) -- gil
