> That one wouldn't pass muster as a California vanity license plate Geez. Had not noticed that. Sheesh!
> I once tried to define a prototype with DCs; Briefly, here is what I do: - Code a separate CSECT for my "model" (as I call it) - Code all of the MF=L and constants and so forth there - Define a symbol for the length of all of it - GETMAIN or otherwise allocate reentrant storage of that length - MVC or MVCL the CSECT storage to the reentrant storage for the defined length - Address the reentrant storage with USING model_CSECT,rent_storage Because it is a separate CSECT there is no addressing ambiguity. I could try to post a more complete version if anyone is interested. Charles -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2018 5:26 PM To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: Re: IEATDUMP MF=L Can someone explain this? On 2018-08-25, at 14:27:44, Charles Mills wrote: > +2 > > Labels belong in column 1 where your eye can scan for them. > Who thinks up these macro names, anyway? That one wouldn't pass muster as a California vanity license plate. > It's great that the new MF=L macros do not require initialization but is > "which ones" documented anywhere? I tend to use a "model" scheme for > initializing the DSECT with the MF=L's that works well for me, so I always > use it. > I once tried to define a prototype with DCs; move it into obtained storage for reentrancy, then map it with dependent USINGs. No luck; got ambiguous resolution. Would have worked if dependent USING allowed for a lower bound as well as an upper bound. (64-bit is a greater challenge.)
