Re: Bogus ASMA307E?

[Paul Gilmartin]

On 2016-12-20, at 17:19, Webster, Chris wrote:

> What is your initial using for r13?  Is DLTABLE part of that dsect?  
> 
That shouldn't matter for a dependent USING which is supposed
to map one DSECT over part of another DSECT.

There's some Bad History here.  Warnings for overlapping USINGs and
multiple resolution were provided before long displacements (over which
HLASM had no control) and dependent usings (over which HLASM had
complete control.)


> -Original Message-
> From: Steve Smith
> Sent: December-20-16 10:15 AM
> 
> Well, I found a work-around:
> 
> *USING DLTABD,DLTABLE  This fails w/ASMA307E
>USING DLTABD-4000,DLTABLE-4000 Trick to fool HLASM
> 
In fact, I recall by experiment that the second offset can be
absurdly large, anything within 32-bit range, well beyond any
currently supported displacement (that I know of).

If I had a dog in this fight, and I had raised it from a puppy before
dependent USINGs and long displacements, I'd change the rule so that
warnings and errors were never reported at the USING instruction,
not even one that's documented but not (IIRC) reported.  I would report
multiple resolutions (and, of course unresolvables) at the point at
which they occur.

One day I might submit an SR on a case in which a base and displacement
are resolved which are algebraically wrong in AMODE 64.  I believe an
overflow during resolution is not reported.  The restriction of
assembly-time arithmetic does not excuse generating code which is
clearly incorrect in AMODE 64 and questionable in AMODE 31 or 24.

-- gil

Re: Bogus ASMA307E?

[Webster, Chris]

What is your initial using for r13?  Is DLTABLE part of that dsect?  

Just checked some code and
 USING (X,X@END),R11
Seems to work (at least it does for dasm).

A dependent using (from the active usings hdr):
DBST(X'10994'),R11+X'32FC'

X dsect has
DBSTmDSXL(DBST$)
The using is:
 USING DBST,DBSTm

...chris.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On 
Behalf Of Steve Smith
Sent: December-20-16 10:15 AM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Bogus ASMA307E?

Well, I found a work-around:

*USING DLTABD,DLTABLE  This fails w/ASMA307E
 USING DLTABD-4000,DLTABLE-4000 Trick to fool HLASM

My brain exploded trying to figure out the workarounds in the old postings.

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Steve Smith <sasd...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Well if that's the design, then the design is an ass.  But I don't see 
> how that's the case, as the manual says otherwise.
>
> I finally found Robert Ngan's nearly identical post from 2 years ago, 
> and several older ones, too.  There was one reference that implied IBM 
> won't fix it because of "compatibility" issues.  Frankly, that sounds 
> like a cop-out; it would be more understandable to just say that it's 
> not a high enough priority yet.
>
> And IBM hasn't bothered to update the manual either.  Sheesh.
>
> Google was not my friend today.  Apparently, the assembler-list 
> archives aren't Googleable.
>
> Is there an outstanding SHARE req. for this?
>
> sas
>
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Paul Gilmartin 
> <0014e0e4a59b-dmarc- requ...@listserv.uga.edu> wrote:
>
>> On 2016-12-20, at 09:13, Steve Smith wrote:
>>
>> > I'm getting an error on a dependent USING apparently just because 
>> > it's
>> out
>> > of the normal 12-bit offset range...
>> >
>> > This seems to be a HLASM bug to me.
>> >
>> No.  WAD.  This has been discussed here before.  (No, I don't like 
>> it.)
>>
>> -- gil
>>
>
>
>
> --
> sas
>



--
sas

Re: Bogus ASMA307E?

[Steve Smith]

Well, I found a work-around:

*USING DLTABD,DLTABLE  This fails w/ASMA307E
 USING DLTABD-4000,DLTABLE-4000 Trick to fool HLASM

My brain exploded trying to figure out the workarounds in the old postings.

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Steve Smith  wrote:

> Well if that's the design, then the design is an ass.  But I don't see how
> that's the case, as the manual says otherwise.
>
> I finally found Robert Ngan's nearly identical post from 2 years ago, and
> several older ones, too.  There was one reference that implied IBM won't
> fix it because of "compatibility" issues.  Frankly, that sounds like a
> cop-out; it would be more understandable to just say that it's not a high
> enough priority yet.
>
> And IBM hasn't bothered to update the manual either.  Sheesh.
>
> Google was not my friend today.  Apparently, the assembler-list archives
> aren't Googleable.
>
> Is there an outstanding SHARE req. for this?
>
> sas
>
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Paul Gilmartin <0014e0e4a59b-dmarc-
> requ...@listserv.uga.edu> wrote:
>
>> On 2016-12-20, at 09:13, Steve Smith wrote:
>>
>> > I'm getting an error on a dependent USING apparently just because it's
>> out
>> > of the normal 12-bit offset range...
>> >
>> > This seems to be a HLASM bug to me.
>> >
>> No.  WAD.  This has been discussed here before.  (No, I don't like it.)
>>
>> -- gil
>>
>
>
>
> --
> sas
>



-- 
sas

Re: Bogus ASMA307E?

[Steve Smith]

Well if that's the design, then the design is an ass.  But I don't see how
that's the case, as the manual says otherwise.

I finally found Robert Ngan's nearly identical post from 2 years ago, and
several older ones, too.  There was one reference that implied IBM won't
fix it because of "compatibility" issues.  Frankly, that sounds like a
cop-out; it would be more understandable to just say that it's not a high
enough priority yet.

And IBM hasn't bothered to update the manual either.  Sheesh.

Google was not my friend today.  Apparently, the assembler-list archives
aren't Googleable.

Is there an outstanding SHARE req. for this?

sas

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Paul Gilmartin <
0014e0e4a59b-dmarc-requ...@listserv.uga.edu> wrote:

> On 2016-12-20, at 09:13, Steve Smith wrote:
>
> > I'm getting an error on a dependent USING apparently just because it's
> out
> > of the normal 12-bit offset range...
> >
> > This seems to be a HLASM bug to me.
> >
> No.  WAD.  This has been discussed here before.  (No, I don't like it.)
>
> -- gil
>



-- 
sas

Re: Bogus ASMA307E?

[Paul Gilmartin]

On 2016-12-20, at 09:13, Steve Smith wrote:

> I'm getting an error on a dependent USING apparently just because it's out
> of the normal 12-bit offset range...
> 
> This seems to be a HLASM bug to me.
> 
No.  WAD.  This has been discussed here before.  (No, I don't like it.)

-- gil