Peter, I take your point, and I of course believe you when you say that you meant what you wrote (ands tghat you object to my faulty paraphrase).
Let me therefore take full responsibility for that paraphrase myself. AMODE(64) seems to me to be the only appreopiate way to mark an object that is to be resident above the bar, and in particular, one that while refreshable contains metadata, relocatable doubleword pointers to locations within itself. IBM has an understandably long history of omitting to enforce some eminently reasonable constraint until that point in time at which it judges it appropriate to do so; and marking an object, even a read-only one, that is destined to reside above the bar as AMODE(31) is, I think, an act of hubris. One may well get away with it for a time, and even take pleasure in having done so; but whom the gods would destroy they first make proud. (Nemesis, In the retelling of the Greek myth by Robert Graves, keeps the list of such acts of hubris, finally meting out mercilous and terrtible punishments for them.) 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
