Yes, all the lines coded after the OPSYN will treat the "LA" instruction as a "LAY" until you suspend it with a new "LA OPSYN ," -----Mensagem original----- De: IBM Mainframe Assembler List <ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU> Em nome de Schmitt, Michael Enviada em: quinta-feira, 14 de julho de 2022 11:30 Para: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Assunto: Re: YA MGCRE RCF?
I've never used OPSYN. Can this technique be used with the execute form of the CALL macro, so that the linkage items can be further away from the base registers? -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List <ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU> On Behalf Of João Reginato Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2022 8:53 AM To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: RES: YA MGCRE RCF? You can code e new line with " LA OPSYN LAY" just before the original CALL. Try it. Regards João -----Mensagem original----- De: IBM Mainframe Assembler List <ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU> Em nome de Steve Smith Enviada em: quarta-feira, 13 de julho de 2022 14:50 Para: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Assunto: Re: YA MGCRE RCF? I created a macro to generate parmlists with optional specification for how an operand is addressed. Briefly, CALLV program,(parm1,parm2,(parm3,Y),parm4) where parm3 would be addressed with LAY instead of LA. The macro actually just appends the 2nd operand to LA (i.e. 'LA&SYSLIST(&N,2)'), so it's flexible and simple. Obviously, this depends on the macro electing to support that technique, and the hundreds of IBM service macros that require addresses aren't likely to be so enhanced. But in general, if something needs exotic addressing, you just have to get the address into a register yourself, and pass that in. All in all, it's probably not enough of a problem to be worth a ton of effort trying to make it easier. I think Jonathan's post implies that it would be a big deal for HLASM. As for example code that IBM provides, I haven't seen any yet that would pass our code review, and many that would fail to assemble. Nevertheless, they're useful for their purpose. As far as I'm concerned, the base register setup instructions are unnecessary clutter anyway. If you need help with that, you're in the wrong manual. sas On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 8:27 AM Peter Relson <rel...@us.ibm.com> wrote: > Definitely the lack of an equate for R12 should be corrected (such as > by adding an equate and a BASR R12,0). I'll get that taken care of. > > Almost all macros expect some amount of addressability to static data > for certain invocations. That will not be stated for individual > macros. That is why "baseless" coding is usually not a valid approach if > using z/OS macros. > You tend at least to need addressability to static data. > > The MGCRE example isn't even for that case; it needs addressability to > get to the static data that is used (the text and consname). Macros, > in general, have no way of knowing if they could use "LARL" so don't even try. > > An entertaining thought for an assembler enhancement would be a > pseudo-op that generated "LA" or "LARL" depending on whether the > target was in a CSECT or a DSECT (maybe allowing for LAY too). > > Peter Relson > z/OS Core Technology Design >
