What's wrong with using LOCTR in a customer-facing macro? ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List <ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU> on behalf of Tony Thigpen <t...@vse2pdf.com> Sent: Monday, November 8, 2021 9:08 AM To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: Re: Base-less macros
My regular code has used location counters for about 20 years. But, that is not applicable to the question at hand, which is a service calling macro provided to customers. Tony Thigpen Seymour J Metz wrote on 11/8/21 8:08 AM: > Well, my preferred approach is to use a location counter. I would say don't > branch around anything, but I like to have extra text in my save area > trace-back, so I put up with the otherwise extraneous branch.. > > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > > ________________________________________ > From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] on > behalf of Tony Thigpen [t...@vse2pdf.com] > Sent: Sunday, November 7, 2021 7:25 PM > To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU > Subject: Base-less macros > > I finally am to the point where I no longer need to worry about specific > customers having hardware that does not support relative instructions, > so I am updating some macros I provide to be baseless. > > What is the 'preferred' approach to macro generated constants? In the > past, I have used both inline constants that I branch around, and ltorg > literals (=c'x'). > > In the past, I have been bitten by using ltorg literals and the client > did not put a LTORG after my macro causing a 'no active base register' > issue. So, I am thinking inline with a BRAS is better. > > Maybe there is another approach that I missed? > > Suggestions? > > Tony Thigpen >
