Nothing is wrong with a comment that elucidates the purpose of the instruction. A comment that merely translates the instruction is worse than useless.
I can already figure out that the instruction will be executed; tell me *why* in the comment. How does it fit in the broader scheme of things? Where are the EX instructions and what is the significance of the lengths that they use? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [[email protected]] on behalf of [email protected] [[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2020 10:48 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: *-* On 2020-04-30 07:08, Kerry Liles wrote: > I always thought that some programmers did that as an "eye catcher" > to indicate that the value might nominally be zero but it will be > dynamically modified elsewhere... > (perhaps by an EX or worse - direct smashing) > A naked zero is not remarkable but *-* is sort of jarring... to the > reader. What's wrong with a comment?
