Writing code using relative addressing, as much as reasonably possible.
Problem: some IBM macros, e.g., ATTACH(X) and STORAGE, generate L and LA(E)
instructions instead of, e.g., LRL and LA(E)Y.
STORAGE OBTAIN,
Length=(0),
Loc=(31,31)
generates this instruction
L 15,=AL1(B'00000000',(0*16),(0),B'01110110')
requiring a base register
instead of, e.g.,
LRL 15,=AL1(B'00000000',(0*16),(0),B'01110110')
(Load Relative Long) which does not.
ATTACHX EP=SUBTASK
generates
LAE 15,IHB0098 SET UP LIST ADDRESS
instead of
LAEY 15,IHB0098 SET UP LIST ADDRESS
Temporary base-displacement addressing can be established prior to issuing
these macros, but that defeats the purpose of relative addressing.
These macros are included:
SYSSTATE ARCHLVL=2 Support for relative addressing
IEABRCX DEFINE
IEABRCX ENABLE Change base-displacement to relative
but apply to branch instructions, not load.
Any perspectives would be helpful, either with an alternative solution, or
that, like taxes, you live with it.
Thanks –
Richard Zierdt
Confidentiality Warning/Avertissement de confidentialité:
This message is intended only for the named recipients. This message may
contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you are not the
named recipient, its employee or its agent, please notify us immediately and
permanently destroy this message and any copies you may have. Ce message est
destiné uniquement aux destinataires dûment nommés. Il peut contenir de
l'information privilégiée ou confidentielle. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire
dûment nommé, son employé ou son mandataire, veuillez nous aviser sans tarder
et supprimer ce message ainsi que toute copie qui peut en avoir été faite.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
