On Wed, 5 Apr 2017 13:29:55 -0400, Tony Harminc <[email protected]> posted: >On 5 April 2017 at 12:52, somitcw ><[email protected]> wrote: >> For many decades, I've been using "ORG ," so it may be time for me to change? > ORG with an omitted operand is fine as long as you understand that it >sets the location counter to "the next available address in the >current control section". This is why Gil warned of the hazard of a >prior ORG. If someone - probably unrelated to and unaware of your >macro - has previously defined a location beyond where your macro >expands, a plain ORG will not "undo" your ORG *-4, but will move >further forward to that highest previous location. >Tony H.
Thank you for your clear and complete explanation. "ORG ," will not be used. "ORG *+3" is safer.
