Mr. Day, I agree that further exchanges between us would not be useful: your judgment that you can learn nothing from me is almost certainly correct. I shall not comment on one of your posts again.
--jg On 8/25/12, Dave Day <[email protected]> wrote: > Mr. Gilmore, > > You are so out of line on this that it is pathetic. > > For me to try to discover if there is some way to influence memory > allocation is a reasonable approach to writing code. The fewer > the number of times my code runs thru allocation, the better it will > perform. > > CPOOL services provides this for 31 bit users. When I did not see > anything for IARCP64, I thought I was missing something, somewhere. > > You're 1st response about EXPAND= indicated you did not understand > the reason/purpose of the original post. > You're 2nd response to check the prologue is inaccurate, from the > standpoint of the original post. There is nothing in the prologue > that indicates the size of the memory object. I've read it, and I saw > nothing. This is on a 1.12 ADCD system. Possibly there is on some > system you have access to, but not on mine. > > And now this. > > The last time you and I had any direct contact on this list was > some years back, during a discussion about hooking PC's. I questioned some > assertions you were making, and the next thing I got from you was a > private email where you indicated that what you were doing was > modifying the default assembler action to insert your code into the code > path for a PC at assembly time....hardly the equivalent of code that > goes into > a running system and places itself in the code path of of executed > Program Calls. > > Subsequent to that interchange for some period, I deleted from my > in-box anything emanating from you. Some time back I was reading a post > by someone else where they complimented you on your mastery of the > English language, and stated they always enjoyed reading your posts if > for no > other reason than it sent them to a dictionary and they always learned > something. So, with that in mind, I started reading some of your posts. > And I have to admit, you are able to use the language to a degree that > few have achieved. > > If you don't like the content of someone's post, the proper thing > to do is to ignore it. It is obvious that your language skills far > exceed your programming skill > and experience, and from time to time you display that. > > I don't know what happened this time to cause you to dump on me. > Perhaps you are just getting older, the body is wearing out, and it is > giving > you some discomfort when you remove it from your anus to go about your > daily chores. > > --Dave Day > > > On 8/25/2012 8:03 AM, John Gilmore wrote: >> I confess to some dissatisfaction with both the tone and the substance >> of Mr Day's OP. >> >> He was seeking to use a facility about which he clearly knew nothing >> in detail while|whilst complaining that its syntax was not identical >> to that of its [very approximate] AMODE(31) analogue. >> >> Moreover, the prolog[ue] is in the macro; and my advice that it read >> it was thus straightforward. Moreover again, this advice is not >> novel. Several IBM contributors here and on the assembler list have >> noted that the 'prologs' should be consulted for detailed information >> of this kind. >> >> I should have been prepared to walk him through the use of IARCP64 if >> he had first made even the minimal appropriate effort to understand >> it. Things are bigger above the bar; he clearly had no grasp of this >> notion; and without it I judged that he was not likely to make much >> progress. >> >> These things said, I agree with Shane that those of us who have used >> and know something about the above-the-bar facilities that IBM is >> making available have an obligation to be helpful to colleagues who >> have less experience with them. >> >> Excluding Shane's post from this stricture explicitly, I must also >> confess that I have little patience with a class of other posts that >> seem to me to be insular, suspiciously unanimous, risk-averse, and >> mediocre. I shall try to do better. >> >> John Gilmore, Ashland, MA 01721 - USA >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN >> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
