Jon,
Enough been said about the reason and the cause (and solutions)
But who dictates techniques for vendors?
While your points are okay- the trick to have the definitions right at the beginning of the module (with just a J in front) is something that makes sense for everyone. If you ever
I agree. It is very nice. sigh Now to change my habits ... again. /sigh
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 6:37 AM, Martin Trübner mar...@pi-sysprog.de wrote:
Jon,
Enough been said about the reason and the cause (and solutions)
But who dictates techniques for vendors?
While your points are okay- the
On Apr 11, 2013, at 06:40, John McKown wrote:
I agree. It is very nice. sigh Now to change my habits ... again. /sigh
LOCTR can alleviate that impact.
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 6:37 AM, Martin Trübner mar...@pi-sysprog.de wrote:
Jon,
Enough been said about the reason and the cause (and
On 4/11/2013 5:37 AM, Martin Trübner wrote:
Jon,
Enough been said about the reason and the cause (and solutions)
But who dictates techniques for vendors?
While your points are okay- the trick to have the definitions right at the
beginning of the module (with just a J in front) is something
From: Steve Comstock st...@trainersfriend.com
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 7:47:33 AM
Subject: Re: Baseless problem
Interesting how COBOL-ish that part is: data division
before procedure division.
“Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.” (perhaps)
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Steve Comstock st...@trainersfriend.comwrote:
...snip...Well, Ed's super sharp but I think that technique has been
around a while.
Amen. I saw it first in code in 1976, with the eyecatcher preceded by a
one-byte length field for the eyecatcher. That one byte
On 4/11/2013 6:52 AM, Mike Shaw wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Steve Comstock st...@trainersfriend.comwrote:
...snip...Well, Ed's super sharp but I think that technique has been
around a while.
Amen. I saw it first in code in 1976, with the eyecatcher preceded by a
one-byte length
On Apr 11, 2013, at 08:32, Ed Jaffe wrote:
The oldest assembler I ever used was IFOX00. ISTR, it did not have
support for LOCTR but my memory could be faulty.
I believe LOCTR is fairly new. Some of my co-workers are old
enough not to know about it. Bitsavers would probably know,
but why
The oldest assembler I ever used was IFOX00. ISTR, it did not have
support for LOCTR but my memory could be faulty.
I cut my teeth on ACP. ACP assembler code included set symbols like BG15
(possibly still there in zTPF).
This naming is a relic of an Assembler that, AFAIK, pre-dated OS/360.
et
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Ed Jaffe edja...@phoenixsoftware.comwrote:
The oldest assembler I ever used was IFOX00. ISTR, it did not have
support for LOCTR but my memory could be faulty.
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/
You are of course correct; my reference was to eyecatcher
On 4/11/2013 7:45 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
I believe LOCTR is fairly new. Some of my co-workers are old
enough not to know about it. Bitsavers would probably know,
but why bother.
Why bother? I am curious to know how Mike Shaw observed the
literals-physically-first technique implemented
On 4/11/2013 7:55 AM, Mike Shaw wrote:
You are of course correct; my reference was to eyecatcher placement
after the initial instruction in the CSECT, which was a branch around
the eyecatcher and its length byte.
Ahhh. That's where the confusion comes from! :)
See pages 48-50 of my 2011 SHARE
How about something like this:
BEGIN CSECT
USING BEGIN ,15
LR 12,15
DROP 1 5
USING BEGIN,12
B ORIGIN2
ORIGIN1 EQU *
ORG *+1000
ORIGIN2 put all your executable code here, which includes
He said that he did, IIRC.
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Steve Comstock
st...@trainersfriend.com wrote:
On 4/11/2013 9:33 AM, Ed Jaffe wrote:
snip
I wonder if the OP got his problem solved.
--
Kind regards,
-Steve Comstock
The Trainer's Friend, Inc.
303-355-2752
Guys:
I wanted to say a BIG THX...I got my code to assemble still working thru design
and coding issues..but hey what's
life without a challenge or two or three...
Heres my new code..I had to changes things for obivious reasons.
SAMPLE01 AMODE 31
SAMPLE01 RMODE ANY
YREGS
Ed Jaffe noted...
The oldest assembler I ever used was IFOX00. ISTR, it did not
have support for LOCTR but my memory could be faulty.
I think your memory is correct.
As I remember the IFOX assembler used basically the four-pass structure of
Assembler F. It was developed and supported by a
On 4/11/2013 7:37 AM, Martin Trübner wrote:
While your points are okay- the trick to have the definitions right at
the beginning of the module (with just a J in front) is something that
makes sense for everyone. If you ever tried to calculate offset in a
DOB-program (data only base) from the
Mike Shaw wrote:
Amen. I saw it first in code in 1976, with the eyecatcher preceded by a
one-byte length field for the eyecatcher. That one byte length is used by
the dump formatter to print the eyecatchers when formatting the save area
chain.
... and the eyecatcher, the 3rd operand of SAVE
On 11 April 2013 10:32, Ed Jaffe edja...@phoenixsoftware.com wrote:
The oldest assembler I ever used was IFOX00. ISTR, it did not have
support for LOCTR but my memory could be faulty.
It matches mine.
It's worth remembering that ASMH predates IFOX00. (Well, as far as
customer availability
Tony Harminc commented:
Tony
It's worth remembering that ASMH predates IFOX00. (Well, as far as
customer availability goes; I have no idea what went on inside IBM.)
I have never understood the point of IFOX00; it appears to be a
reimplemention from scratch to the IEUASM specs, with a couple of
Tony Harminc wonders...
I can only guess at the internal politics in play at the time that
must have led to this project, when ASMH already existed and offered
so much more. IBM's usual internal competition, I suppose, but in such
a small subject area...
AFAIR... core..! hmm virtual memory,
Slightly different opinion on my side:
I just expanded our local startup macro to support
baseless code areas. The standard startup macro especially for
main programs generates lots of instructions, that count for some
600 bytes (for example: error handling, buildung a LE environment etc.).
So I
Although the eyecatcher on SAVE (one byte length field
at EPA+4 followed by the message) seems to be kind of part of
the OS linkage conventions, no other IBM language processor like the
PL/1 compiler or LE ever used it - I never understood this. This discourages
the use of SYSUDUMP for error
I recall that one time when we reported an error to IBM where
an ASSEMBLER module was involved, we got the simple and short answer
Customer should not use ASSEMBLER
I don't recall what the problem was, maybe something involving DB2 and the
DB2 precompiler for ASSEMBLER ...
Am 11.04.2013
Reading again:
there is no problem finding the (static) data, even if the USING point
is not
at the beginning of the module; if you have the load point of the
module, which
you get easily from CDE/XTLST, then you add the offsets of the variables
from
the CSECT.
Oh, I see, you are VSE normally -
Scott,
The next most efficient technique after using a sanctioned slot in the area
referenced by ECVTCTBL is Name/Token services. A System-level Name/Token in
would be needed in this case.
Keven
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List
LOCTR has been around since at least the mid-1980s.
I had to debug a full-screen editor that used it heavily. This would have been
the H-Assembler with SLAC mods.
Lloyd
- Original Message
From: Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Sent: Thu, April
On 11/04/2013 20:23, Tony Harminc wrote:
On 11 April 2013 10:32, Ed Jaffe edja...@phoenixsoftware.com wrote:
The oldest assembler I ever used was IFOX00. ISTR, it did not have
support for LOCTR but my memory could be faulty.
It matches mine.
It's worth remembering that ASMH predates IFOX00.
Scott,
A couple more suggestions.
1. add 'ieabrcx enable' (or maybe it was snipped)
2. use larl 12,const instead of lr/ahi - it will make amode 64 conversion easier
3. limit the using range to avoid base register bleed beyond the intended range
'using (const,constend),12'
4. both dataloc1/2
Bernd Oppolzer schrieb:
... the OS linkage conventions, no other IBM language processor like
the PL/1 compiler or LE ever used it - I never understood this.
LE was a game changer. Prior to LE almost all programs and modules
adhered to __one and the same set__ of rules, including IBM access
Andreas:
Amen to that. I am working with LE now ..a lot of serious differences,
especially
when ppl dont run the right run options.. like STACK() ...
Scott J Ford
Software Engineer
http://www.identityforge.com/
From: Andreas F. Geissbuehler
Chris:
thanks for the suggestion much appreciated...I am writing more code
tonight...so i will let you all now how it comes out
Scott J Ford
Software Engineer
http://www.identityforge.com/
From: Webster, Chris chris_webs...@bmc.com
To:
Sorry if I offended anyone. That was not my intent. NEED TO was not meant to
dictate what vendors must do. Only that additional considerations exist that
have an impact in a product environment. I just wanted Scott to consider the
following now instead of after RTM. These possible problems
33 matches
Mail list logo
