In a recent note, Rob Scott said:
> Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 09:53:49 -0400
>
> Maybe this is a bit of a religious war - but I have always disliked "LA
> Rx,integer" - for maintainability (and readability) I would much prefer
> "L Rx,=F'integer'.
>
The maintainability issue has been made very clear (well, only to
some of us; I'll restate it): If by evolution "integer" grows
beyond the displacement limit (or the LHI limit), the programmer
must make the transition to the memory-reference form.
Yet, I prefer "L Rx,=A(equated-symbol)" so the equated symbol may
be used in other contexts, such as storage declarations.
But where is the readability concern/advantage?
LA Rx,FRED
L Rx,=A(FRED)
both appear to mean the same to me. And I'd avoid using
self defining terms in machine instructions.
How do other readers feel about:
SIZE EQU 2 * SIZE of an array entry
...
MH Rx,=Y(SIZE)
versus:
AR Rx,Rx * Multiply by SIEZ of an array entry
... for performance, readability, and maintainability? (The
typo is deliberate.)
-- gil
--
StorageTek
INFORMATION made POWERFUL
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
