On Feb 12, 2022, at 18:21:59, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>
> Why not CVB/LTR/BC?
>
It appears that the OP wants to "validate"; detect and
report the non-modal sign codes.
If the original is zoned it might require:
PACK; CVB; CVD; UNPK; CLC
> ________________________________________
> From: Paul Gilmartin
> Sent: Friday, February 11, 2022 1:14 PM
>
> On Feb 11, 2022, at 11:00:58, Dave Clark wrote:
>>
>> I know that x'F1' and x'C1' are positive and that x'D1' is
>> negative. But what if I find x'A1', x'B1', or x'E1' for overpunch values?
>> What is the shortest way (in terms of assembler instructions) to validate
>> these into just two classes -- positive and negative?
>>
> How about CVB then CVD, then compare the result to the original?
--
gil
