I like the idea -- in fact it was on my Christmas Wish List that I sent to John E. every once in a while. How desirable would it be to not tie it to a USING? There's no reason a register other than a USING base shouldn't be able to be declared Constant. Making it part of a USING would make it easier to un-protect the register automatically via a DROP, but it would also make it difficult to avoid flagging cases where the user wanted to step through an array by incrementing the base register at the end of a loop. Pros and cons for each approach....
- mb Binyamin Dissen <[email protected]> wrote on 06/25/2018 11:49 AM: > > Since the assembler knows which instructions modify which registers, it would > be nice if there was a way to "protect" a register for a code range. > > Perhaps > > USING area,Rx,protect > > Any alteration of the register until the DROP would cause a warning message on > the instruction. > > Or might such an option exist?
