I'm so use to splitting the name after the 3rd character I did not even notice
this, until one of our younger programmers pronounced it as "I EAT DUMP"
Robert Ngan
HCL Technologies
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List On Behalf
Of Jim Mulder
Sent: Sunday, August 26,
Bytes are cheap. (30-40 bytes anyway. )
Programmer time is expensive.
Bugs are very expensive.
I may just keep doing it the way I have been.
CharlesSent from a mobile; please excuse the brevity.
Original message From: Steve Smith Date:
8/27/18 12:04 PM (GMT-05:00) To:
Me too. But remember, This is for NEW macros, the ones whose MF=E forms
start with something like XC 88(,1),0(1), and use MF=(L,xxx).
The older ones, that often have required data in the MF=L form, still
have to be copied first. Typically you would put those MF=L in static
storage, and
On 8/27/2018 4:45 AM, Charles Mills wrote:
Consider using the same list area for multiple services
Is that documented anywhere?
In other words, you are saying -- just to pick three macros that come to
mind -- I could issue an ATTACHX, an EXTRACT and a CLOSE and use the same
MF=L area for all
On 2018-08-27, at 06:20:40, Peter Relson wrote:
>
>> I've never had the slightest need to use the labels generated in the
> MF=L form. Who does? They're not documented. I'll grant that they can
> probably be considered self-documenting, but is there a reasonable
> guarantee the labels won't
On Mon, 27 Aug 2018 07:45:08 -0400, Charles Mills wrote:
>> making sure that you have allotted the maximum that any of them could need
>
>How would I make sure of that (other than by "hacking" the macros or by
>doing a test assembly)?
MF_L_AREA DS 0D
MACRO_1_L MACRO1 MF=L
ORG MF_L_AREA
> I've never had the slightest need to use the labels generated in the
MF=L form. Who does? They're not documented. I'll grant that they can
probably be considered self-documenting, but is there a reasonable
guarantee the labels won't be changed in a new release? The MF=E
expansions don't
> Consider using the same list area for multiple services
Is that documented anywhere?
In other words, you are saying -- just to pick three macros that come to
mind -- I could issue an ATTACHX, an EXTRACT and a CLOSE and use the same
MF=L area for all (assuming the re-sue considerations you
