Ooh. Don't know if I like that or if the "WTF?" factor for *+8 as a "label" is too great.
Charles -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Phil Smith III Sent: Thursday, August 2, 2018 7:02 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: EQU * considered harmful Charles Mills wrote: >I have a house rule to use J (not B!) *+n only to jump over a single instruction, never more than one. Yeah, it may be a problem waiting to happen, especially now with machine instruction length a little less intuitive (change A to AG and there goes your J *+8). What I like about it is that labels invite the question "who jumps here?"* so if I can avoid a label I do. It's a tradeoff. No one ever said assembler coding was for the faint-hearted. I did that until recently (like a year ago), when somebody convinced me it was evil. Well, convinced me enough to stop; I sort of agree that if you can't handle it, don't be doin' no assembler, but I still stopped. I used to use this format: TM FLAG,BIT JO *+8 L R1,WHATEVER *+8 DS 0H That made it clear where it was going and thus made it harder (I think) to insert stuff blindly, while not encouraging anyone else to branch there :) ...phsiii
