On 25 Feb 2013 12:14:09 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
(Message-ID:<0e6f70937cdd8b4c83a5069c6296b38422b86...@xch-phx-101.sw.nos.boeing.com>)
[email protected] (EXT-Schwarz, Barry) wrote:
Regarding your translate tables, rather than manually
counting the number of x'00' bytes to insert between
non-zero ones and manually coding the hex values for
characters, I suggest the following approach:
TRTABLE1 DC 256X'00'
ORG TRTABLE1+C'C'
DC C'C'
ORG TRTABLE1+C'E'
DC C'EF'
ORG TRTABLE1+C'I'
DC C'I'
...
ORG TRTABLE+C'Z'
ORG C'Z'
ORG
And, in fact, coding the tables like this should fix
the problem. The first table is not 256 bytes long (note
that the last 2 lines are commented out). The TRT
instruction is where the Z of the first table is, so the
first TRT hits and the code never gets to the test for
class Z.
My feeling has always been that the Assembler counts
better than I do, so I code what I mean and let the
Assembler do the counting and adding.
In
Message-ID:<897c82fc69765d45a301af8f5d1210cb0df5481...@otb6mail01.executive.stateofwv.gov>,
[email protected] (Crabtree, Anne D) wrote:
>Here's the part of code that I changed: (I'm not the
greatest assembler programmer so be kind :))
And here's an unsolicited suggestion: After a TRT,
don't use
BC 2, use BZ or BNZ. Few of us remember which bits mean
what.
--
I cannot receive mail at the address this was sent from.
To reply directly, send to ar23hur "at" pobox "dot" com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
