There was an assembler warning (and it was considered "bad form" if a
programmer used the same construction).
On 2021-01-21 9:35 p.m., Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On 2021-01-21, at 19:07:36, Gary Weinhold wrote:
... the GET still has a "L 15,24(1)".
Is there any harm in that? In days of yore there may have
been a performance penalty, but now?
In a contrived case, it may depend on displacement reach:
USING 5000,2
LA 15,6000(1)
but not:
USING 5000,2
LA 15,6000(,1)
It also contained CICS macro DFHRMCAL that generated a CSECT statement
instead of saving and using &SYSSTYP. We were using this macro in RSECTs.
Isn't that the long way around instead of:
&SYSLOC LOCTR
???
So it wasn't all about reentrant code; but it was about a lead
programmer who wanted all assemblies to end with no errors with all
warnings flags set, especially for less experienced programmers.
-- gil
Gary Weinhold
Senior Application Architect
DATAKINETICS | Data Performance & Optimization
Phone:+1.613.523.5500 x216
Email: [email protected]
Visit us online at www.DKL.com
E-mail Notification: The information contained in this email and any
attachments is confidential and may be subject to copyright or other
intellectual property protection. If you are not the intended recipient, you
are not authorized to use or disclose this information, and we request that you
notify us by reply mail or telephone and delete the original message from your
mail system.
