I was thinking of macros that allow cross-memory RX parameters. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל חַי נֵ֣צַח יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל לֹ֥א יְשַׁקֵּ֖ר
________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on behalf of Peter Relson <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2024 11:53 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Use of, e.g., LAE in IBM macros >How many IBM macros have documentation like "For both primary ASC mode callers >and AR ASC mode callers, >control parameters must be in the primary address space."? Almost all that go so far as to document this (for many others, they should but don't). Of course there are a fair number that allow their data to be ALET-qualified. >Are there any IM macros where requesting use of LAE would be reasonable? With what goal? Saving one instruction (such as doing "LAE" instead of "LR" and "CPYA")? Such a request would not be reasonable. But maybe you have a better goal in mind. For almost all services the rule is that an input AR (or input ALET) is ignored if the caller is not AR mode. There are exceptions. Peter Relson z/OS Core Technology Design ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
