In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 07/19/2005
at 09:41 AM, Bill Fairchild <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>You are correct. You are still missing my point. Suppose the
>original instruction was
>LA Rx,4095 and for whatever reason the logic needs to be changed
>into LA Rx,4096.
I find it hard to imagine such a situation; it sounds like you are
giving me a proposed solution instead of a requirement. If for some
reason the requirements change and the code needs to load 4096 into
the register, then it is trivial to change the opcode along with the
operand.
>This instruction will not assemble.
Lots of wrong instructions won't assemble. The solution is to use a
correct instruction, which will assemble.
>However, if the original instruction was LH Rx,=H'4095' then the
>half word literal can be patched from 4095 to 4096.
That's totally irrelevant to you issue of incorrectly changed code not
assembling.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
