> On 2019-11-27, at 11:24:20, Jonathan Scott wrote:
>
> Ref: Your note of Wed, 27 Nov 2019 13:16:33 -0500
>
>> My point is that XA took away 7 bits that were used for various purposes.
>> Taking all 8 wouldn't have been a lot more painful.
>>
>> sas
>
> Are you serious?
>
He's serious.
On 2019-11-28, at 07:08:16, Peter Relson wrote:
>
>
> there's a little-known "mini-bar" at the high-end of the 31-bit address
> space
>
>
(I'd be grateful if citations of earlier plies included the
Sender and Date so I might consult the entire text. And if
the (old-fashioned) ">" quotation
there's a little-known "mini-bar" at the high-end of the 31-bit address
space
True. The x'7000' page of the address space is intentionally not
mapped in virtual and accessing that location in an address space
(assuming AMODE 31 or 64) will always program check. Maybe some day we'll
do
