The obvious way to support RECFM=VB is for the first 8 columns after the RDW to be the sequence number.
-- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List <[email protected]> on behalf of John McKown <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:27 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Any real need for sequence numbers in 73-80 any more? On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 2:37 AM, Rob van der Heij <[email protected]> wrote: > <snip> > > > It would be liberating to write HLASM wider than 61 columns, especially > when doing structured assembler. It's an easy pipeline to fold the lines > into 71+ for HLASM which could put the original line number * 100 or so as > sequence numbers. I normally assemble within XEDIT using the listing to > steer the editor to the first line causing the error. > I would love HLASM to natively support VB records, similar to "flowasm". I used FLOWASM on occasion. And it is difficult at times to relate the errors in the reformatted HLASM to the line in the FLOWASM input. What might be nice would be something in HLASM akin to the C language's "#line" where you can "reset" the line number to an arbitrary number and have HLASM use that in its messages. > > Rob > -- I have a theory that it's impossible to prove anything, but I can't prove it. Maranatha! <>< John McKown
