On May 23, 2012, at 09:48, John Walker wrote:
... The person, I think it was Mckown, says he likes Bash better, bu I can
see NO benefits to Unix. You can string things together via pipes into a
virtually incomprehensible mishmash of |'s \'s \\'s, 's, etc. And you say
this is wonderful?
On May 27, 2012, at 01:11, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On May 27, 2012, at 00:18, Jon Perryman wrote:
I think that John is asking for an example where the existing BIF's do not
satisfy your situation and what length would expect it to return.
Largely, I was puzzled by the complexity of John's
On May 27, 2012, at 11:13, Jon Perryman wrote:
There is hidden functionality in this macro.
1. I believe that john said that LA will resolve a label reference in the
assembler. I'm not sure of the situations it fixes.
John E. acknowledged in a followup to Ray Mansell's revision
that changing
The matter of Representations and Values is too often
given short shrift in programming language manuals. The
HLASM reference is no better than average.
For example, in the statement:
C SETC
the four apostrophes on the right are the representation
of the value, a single
On May 26, 2012, at 18:28, John Ehrman wrote:
So, HLASM is apparently very good at inferring the length of
the first argument to CLC at Pass 2, when it's needed, even in
the challenging case of a previously unreferenced literal.
By pass 2, the literal is well established, so it's not a
On May 25, 2012, at 07:13, Sharuff Morsa3 wrote:
(I can find no email contact information in this publication.
This has worked for other publications. Will it work for this?)
Title: V1R6 Language Ref
Document Number: SC26-4940-05
The last few pages of the manual (
On May 24, 2012, at 10:05, Steve Comstock wrote:
On 5/24/2012 9:35 AM, Jon Perryman wrote:
Has anyone from IBM endorsed this? POP's doesn't state that the PSW is
decremented to cause re-execution of the instruction.
Thanks, Jon.
Why would the PSW need to be decremented?
c 'decremented'
On May 23, 2012, at 22:27, Jon Perryman wrote:
MVCL is an instruction begging for a macro. Besides loading registers and
destroying the contents of 4 registers upon completion, it is also
interruptible
so you have to ensure the move is complete.
Ensuring the move is complete is handled by
On May 22, 2012, at 07:56, Art Celestini wrote:
Personally, I have not encountered many circumstances where I needed to MVC
using
the length of the source. I suppose that if it were to become a common
practice
for me, something like John Ehrman's macro would clearly be of interest.
I'm
On May 16, 2012, at 08:52, Bodoh John Robert wrote:
O When an assembly error occurs within a macro (syntax or MNOTE), in
addition to giving the line number within the macro, also give the line
numbers and name in the hierarch of macros issued include the top program.
That way, I would be
On 2012-05-16 13:10, Ray Mansell wrote:
Of course, if the assembler were to support the L' construct for
literals, this would not be a problem.
At least during Pass 2.
Lookahead is confusing.
-- gil
The title, V1R6 Language Ref is nearly useless when
searching Publibz for this document. It should include
a meaningful keyword such as HLASM or Assembler.
Is an RCF the proper channel for raising this issue?
(I don't have the Document Number, SC26-4940-05, memorized,
so I do a (wasteful?)
On Apr 30, 2012, at 09:31, Martin Truebner wrote:
but the full title is
High Level Assembler for z/OS z/VM z/VSE
Language Reference Release 6
SC26-4940-05
Where is the problem?
You're assuming that I've found the document in order
to be able to read the title page.
Yea, I know that
On Apr 30, 2012, at 09:39, McKown, John wrote:
E-Mail your comments to this address: comme...@us.ibm.com
What happen to MHVRCFS?
-- gil
On 2012-04-20 11:53, Martin Truebner wrote in ASSEMBLER-LIST:
Did you ever try to copy code from a PDF? As and idea: a funny char
aside of the space (in col 1) and an other one in col 10 and col 16
would make it a easy to rebuild source from a (PDF-)printed manual.
1) There's another good
On Apr 16, 2012, at 06:17, McKown, John wrote:
I was writing on my tablet at home when I posted that. The strangeness is
that although it looks like a GLBA, and the value is incremented if used by
a nested macro, the value within a given invocation of a macro is
unchanging, unless
On Apr 15, 2012, at 12:15, David Stokes wrote:
What I really wonder about such questions is why one doesn't just try it out
instead of waiting for answers from a newsgroup.
Or, read the manual, then try it, then submit an RCF
if the results disagree.
-- gil
On 2012-04-10 14:48, Steve Comstock wrote:
Oh, wait, I see it: the clock rolled over to a new day
and jobs are ordered within day. Very weird, since I'm
using the Dallas system, but not sure the impacts of
running under VM are.
Does SDSF show your sort criteria? Mine are:
On Mar 30, 2012, at 08:27, McKown, John wrote:
I don't know why I'm bothering. As you indicated, this does not seem to be of
much interest. I guess the real UNIX programmers are all using C. I would
be too, if I had access to a z/OS C compiler (and don't mention MVSGCC to me,
I'm just not
On 2012-03-05 12:23, Gainsford, Allen wrote:
On 5/03/2012 12:01 , Paul Gilmartin wrote:
What advantages do data spaces have over 64-bit memory nowadays?
You can extend them.
How far?
Other than that, not much.
-- gil
On Mar 4, 2012, at 15:28, John McKown wrote:
IMO, much easier to LOAD into the address space, then MVCL[E] into the
dataspace.
What advantages do data spaces have over 64-bit memory nowadays?
-- gil
On Mar 1, 2012, at 07:52, David Cole wrote:
It outrages me that a customer's trust would be so egregiously violated. I
believe that it is the duty of those who do know who this vendor is to name
it immediately.
This runs afoul of IBM's practice of security through
obscurity, with which I
On 2012-02-27 14:21, Edward Jaffe wrote:
Maybe FLOWASM should be donated to the CBT as well?
If the author's consent can be obtained.
But, still, I dislike complexity in installation procsses. At least the
installation scripts/JCL should include the FLOWASM step.
-- gil
On Feb 24, 2012, at 08:01, Edward Jaffe wrote:
On 2/24/2012 5:43 AM, John Gilmore wrote:
There had been a tacit assumption that notionally respectable ISVs do
not do such things. That assumption has been undermined, and even
responsible ISVs will now have to spend time and energy reassuring
On Feb 21, 2012, at 12:07, Edward Jaffe wrote:
I believe this change will instruct the assembler to fall back to its own
internal OPEN and READ processing for SYSIN (or whatever DD you're using)
which,
as you know, contains support for z/OS UNIX files.
Why is a RDJFCB required at
On 2012-02-22 12:54, Gerhard Postpischil wrote:
While I can't speak to FLOWASM, I use RDJFCB (or occasionally
the equivalent of TIOT search and JFCB look-up) almost as often
as OPEN. I spent a lot of time working for ISVs and service
bureaus, and frequently wrote or modified utility programs.
On Feb 21, 2012, at 11:22, Ray Mullins wrote:
Might have to switch from RDJFCB to SVC 99...
I recall that some utilities used to print something like
Path specified ... in place of the DSN when the DD was
allocated to a PATH. HLASM did this for a while; it is
now better.
-- gil
On 2012-02-21 15:32, John Ehrman wrote:
Why would anyone specify the NOALIGN option?
Don't know. But I once dealt with a vendor product that included
a small amount assembler code mimicking their compiler output
that assembled properly only with NOALIGN.
-- gil
On Feb 13, 2012, at 06:52, Steve Comstock wrote:
On 2/13/2012 3:49 AM, Thomas Berg wrote:
Why not code: DC X'00' ?
(Just a curious amateur in asm)
Well, the following instruction will be on an
odd boundary, ...
Is this even true if the programmer uses PARM=NOALIGN?
But this is
On 2/14/2012 3:41 PM, robin wrote:
If everyone understands that SR regx,regx and XR regx,regx zero
regx then there is little to no benefit to having a macro that is ZERO
regx.
If so, there's be little need for comments such as the example
XR R5,R5zeroise R5
Something sensible like
On 2/13/2012 5:24 PM, Valeriy Mironenko wrote:
Bad Idea. Плохая идея-изменение мнемоники команд. Команды существуют с 1964
года, если что-то не нравится - напиши свои макро и не забудь написать -
PRINT GEN, когда будешь передавать третьим лицам свои исходники.
Я согласен.
--Гиль
On 2/13/2012 6:59 PM, Steve Smith wrote:
Maybe John Gilmore will provide a witty retort, but you surely must know
that the number of Russian-literate people here is probably pretty low.
Babelfish did nothing but convert this text into HTML entities.
My Russian is rudimentary, so I fell back on
On Feb 13, 2012, at 05:16, robin wrote:
The programming world is littered with it can't happen cases.
Everyone knows Murphy's Law (If anything can go wrong, it will).
But not many have heard of Robert's Law? (Even if it can't go wrong, it
will.)
So, even it the length were tested prior,
On 2/7/2012 3:25 PM, John Gilmore wrote:
I am missing something here.
What form would you like a DDNAME value to take?
Given that the DDNAME value is a character string, I suspect the OP
would like the macro to take an address of a character string as
an argument.
On 2/7/12, Bodoh John
On 1/23/2012 2:27 PM, Steve Comstock wrote:
I prefer to just code something like:
PrintLine DC C'This line is printed to stdout.',x'15'
But, of course, you need to watch for length attributes
if you move or print or otherwise manipulate this; that
is L'PrintLine will not include the one byte
On 1/18/2012 1:20 PM, Gerhard Postpischil wrote:
On 1/18/2012 2:45 PM, Michael Stack wrote:
While binary search trees have been mentioned (by John
Gilmore, IIRC), I keep wondering why so many other solutions
are being suggested. For any repetitive search of a linked
list, converting to a BST
On Jan 16, 2012, at 22:30, robin wrote:
From: Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com
Sent: Tuesday, 17 January 2012 7:33 AM
CDC 3600/3800 had a Modify following instruction instruction
The S/360 and subsequent machines have one like that also.
In the case of MVC/CLC instructions :-
stc 1
On Jan 16, 2012, at 08:21, Kerry wrote:
Performance is one of the strongest reasons for coding in assembler and
this discussion characterizes some of the low hanging fruit available for
the attainment thereof.
Others have said here that performance is a strong reason
for _not_ coding in
On Jan 17, 2012, at 10:07, Edward Jaffe wrote:
The PL/X compiler also generates 'poor' code. (It's one reason it's been
difficult to convince the 'powers that be' to establish a new Architectural
Level Set for z/OS.)
The balance between cost of development and cost of execution may
be biased
On Jan 16, 2012, at 05:35, Tom Marchant wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jan 2012 18:29:55 -0800, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:
The EX CLC is in fact in loop scanning a linked list for the right
entry among 100-200 elements.
You could also do binary search, which will find the right entry
with about log(n)
On Jan 16, 2012, at 07:53, robin wrote:
From: Dan Skomsky, PSTI poodles...@sbcglobal.net
Sent: Monday, 16 January 2012 11:49 PM
One Assembler trick I have seen in speeding up scanning loops was to use a
CLI instruction to check the first byte of a string and then only doing the
CLC/CLCL if
On Jan 13, 2012, at 00:40, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:
(snip, someone wrote)
You've sometimes admonished me for taking the synchronic view
rather than the diachronic. But here, you're being narrowly
synchronic. In the Bad Old Days of Yore, mechanical serial
printers could be commanded to
On Jan 12, 2012, at 17:05, Hall, Keven wrote:
If you're looking to reduce CPU usage you might want to optimize the TRT
the heck out of the equation. Talk about expensive! [augment with
imagined or actual sound of cash register cah-ching sound for added
emphasis/effect]
Boyer-Moore? I
On Jan 11, 2012, at 09:51, John Gilmore wrote:
The name 'underscore' for the character '_' is at best a misnomer.
It cannot be put under another character. In standard IBM terminology
it is a break character.
You've sometimes admonished me for taking the synchronic view
rather than the
On Jan 11, 2012, at 07:03, Rob Scott wrote:
IMHO the first resource needed by any assembler programmer before writing
anything non-trivial is a set of macros that enable subroutine calling,
register saving and return that cater for all environments.
Why doesn't IBM supply these and spare
On 1/10/2012 9:56 AM, John Gilmore wrote:
I too have some sympathy with Paul Gilmartin's objectives, but a
twos-complement representation of a hardware clock would be
problematic in many ways.
Dates alone are of course unproblematic. A signed fullword
Gregorian-Day value is usable to represent
On Jan 8, 2012, at 19:13, John Gilmore wrote:
| What is x'8000 ' interpreted as HFP?
It does not occur as the result of an in-line or library-subroutine
operation, both of which are coerced to be x'_', a 2C
poositive zero.
What happens when this value is made to figure in an
On Jan 8, 2012, at 22:48, robin wrote:
From: John Gilmore
Sent: Monday, 9 January 2012 1:27 PM
There were once a number of ligatures in wide use, but æ|Æ and œ|Œ
are the only ones still in significant current use, particularly in
modern French and classical Latin.
And, for metal
On Jan 9, 2012, at 10:17, John Gilmore wrote:
o 'ffl', 'fi' and the like are typesetters' ligatures, usually found
only in 'expert' fonts and not having their own code points, probably
because needs for them vary from font to font.
Yes. The needs were mechanical because of contention
On 1/9/2012 4:30 PM, Steve Comstock wrote:
calculate interval:
( lmg R2,R5,datetimen pick up end times then start times
slgr R3,R5
slbgr R2,R4
stmg R2,R3,datetimen )
convert interval to format for editing:
( convtod convval=datetimen,etodval=timestart,timetype=dec,
On 1/9/2012 6:56 PM, Steve Comstock wrote:
First: none of the services time, stckconv, convtod produce
or accept as input that is displayable: it all needs some
manipulation.
My reading of the docs is thus (I'm doing this mostly for my
own benefit - it helps me re-think things):
128-bit
On Jan 9, 2012, at 15:37, John Gilmore wrote:
Numbering the BYTES of an STCKE value in zero-origin fashion from left
to right, bytes 14 and 15 contain the programmable-field value. Do
not include it in your calculations. Do include byte 0; after
23:58:43 on 2042 September 17 you will need
On Jan 6, 2012, at 13:47, John Gilmore wrote:
Now the comparison instructions in all of the machine architectures I
am familiar with are ternary. They make the same less-than, equal,
greater-than discrimination that signum makes.
This has baleful consequences. The unavailability of ternary
On Jan 7, 2012, at 13:25, John Gilmore wrote:
begin snippet
Likewise, the arithmetic IF or use of a single-argument signum with
two comparands requires a subtraction which may result in overflow for
extreme comparand values.
/end snippet
I am not quite sure what a 'single-argument signum'
On Jan 6, 2012, at 07:08, John Gilmore wrote:
The scheme for including leap seconds that I posted yesterday has been
widely---by at least two readers---misunderstood. It or a functional
equivalent must/should be used when the underlying time measurement is
a TOD-clock [STCKE] value, an
On 1/4/2012 8:32 PM, James P Connelley wrote:
CONVTOD is the ticket.
Does that yield correct results even when a Daylight Saving
change occurs within the interval?
-- gil
On Jan 2, 2012, at 17:08, John Gilmore wrote:
Under the covers z/OS UNIX libraries are PDSEs, and PDSE member names
are limited to eight characters---majuscules, numerics and @|#|$---the
first of which cannot be numeric.
No.
-- gil
On Dec 30, 2011, at 08:33, Edward Jaffe wrote:
o CASE | NOCASE, and
o MACROCASE|NOMACROCASE
Honestly, I forgot about these options. Thanks for reminding me. I will see if
they meet my needs.
Does IBM guarantee that any macros it distributes will work
correctly regardless of customers'
On Dec 30, 2011, at 12:44, Thomas David Rivers wrote:
This frequently lulls C developers on MVS into believing the
runtime there checks for dereferencing NULL and does something
meaningful with it; or that, for example, strlen(NULL) returns
0... but nope - it's just luck.
Actually, not
On Dec 30, 2011, at 00:34, Edward Jaffe wrote:
I also like camel case. It looks much better than using underscores to
separate
uppercase words. However, I don't consider the assembler's current behavior to
be 'nice'. For example, I will painstakingly plan and create camel case fields
in a
On Dec 27, 2011, at 15:08, McKown, John wrote:
I seen this type of thing in a lot of C code as well. But it depends on the
programmer remembering to check the next pointer for NULL. So what occurred
to me was: Why doesn't the hardware do this?.
Good idea? Or stupid?
You're paddling
On Dec 20, 2011, at 08:29, McKown, John wrote:
Just for learning, and fun (FSVO fun), I'm doing some programming in HLASM
for z/OS UNIX. In the spirit of things, I'm keeping the source in UNIX
subdirectories and using the make UNIX command, in an interactive UNIX
shell, to control the
On Dec 22, 2011, at 08:13, McKown, John wrote:
snip
An off-list discussion has prompted a question: How does BPAM
implement NOTE and POINT for UNIX files? If we create copybook
members with vi, emacs, nedit, jedit, ... and allocate SYSLIB
with FILEDATA=TEXT,RECFM=FB,LRECL=80,PATH=..., the
On Dec 22, 2011, at 13:18, Kirk Talman wrote:
I now find all upper too jarring and visually less clear. I like the
metaphor SHOUTING. I now do Cobol assembler in mixed case. I don't use
- in Cobol. I do use _ in assembler. JCL is still retro.
Programming style is much like artistic
On Dec 22, 2011, at 13:53, John Gilmore wrote:
Keven Hall wrote:
| It's a slippery slope: once they have us using mixed case we'll be
| weakened and confused and that's when they'll go after EBCDIC.
This is clearly jocular, but I resad it trwice to be sure that it was,
and my initial
(Subject changed; Re: ...Digest... is ambiguous and
nonsensical.)
On Dec 22, 2011, at 14:14, Steve Comstock wrote:
On 12/22/2011 1:02 PM, John Walker wrote:
Mixed case is crapola that comes
from the PC side.
Wrong. Several human factors studies have shown mixed
case to be more readable.
On 12/22/2011 16:10, Bodoh John Robert wrote:
I do it a little different. I like mixed case for comments and remarks but
like uppercase for the actual code. The mixed case comments and remarks are
easier to read and the uppercase code is quite distinguishable from the
comments and remarks.
On Dec 20, 2011, at 08:29, McKown, John wrote:
Just for learning, and fun (FSVO fun), I'm doing some programming in HLASM
for z/OS UNIX. In the spirit of things, I'm keeping the source in UNIX
subdirectories and using the make UNIX command, in an interactive UNIX
shell, to control the
On Dec 20, 2011, at 08:43, Ward Able, Grant wrote:
John - will this help?
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/zos/v1r12/index.jsp?topic=%2Fcom.ibm.zos.r12.asma500%2Fasmi102072.htm
Where I read:
CASE
Instructs the assembler to maintain uppercase alphabetic character set
On Dec 20, 2011, at 08:56, Thomas David Rivers wrote:
shameful plug
Well - I don't know of a way in HLASM - but the Dignus assembler
in that environment has a pretty powerful search mechanism that
lets you do precisely that...
You can cause it to use lower or upper-case letters, append
a
On Dec 20, 2011, at 09:10, David Bond wrote:
On Tue, 20 Dec 2011 08:47:00 -0700, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
Right. If HLASM can do it for EXTRNs, why not for macros.
If Binder supports a Mixed/UPPER switch, why not HLASM?
The binder actually supports UNIX files. HLASM uses BPAM. This mess
On Dec 20, 2011, at 09:24, McKown, John wrote:
The binder actually supports UNIX files. HLASM uses BPAM.
This mess is a
result of z/OS's BPAM support of UNIX files.
So, hopefully, some future version of HLASM will directly support UNIX files.
The BPAM support for UNIX seems to be a bit
On 12/20/2011 9:24, McKown, John wrote:
So, hopefully, some future version of HLASM will directly support UNIX files. The BPAM support for
UNIX seems to be a bit lacking. I say this because BPAM does support using all possible
hex values as a member name, excluding 8x'FF'. SMP/E uses really
On Dec 12, 2011, at 15:02, Sam Siegel wrote:
Jacques - You must OPEN the dataset prior to writing to it. You
If you had checked for errors after WRITE and CHECK, this should
have been detected.
should (but are not required to) close the dataset after the last I/O
operation and before
On Dec 12, 2011, at 11:04, Robert Ngan wrote:
All I want to do at this point is determine where the mismatching BAKR/PR
occurs. We can't see which is the active stack entry, but can at least
compare the the contents of the stacked registers in the current entry
before/after a suspect call and
On Dec 8, 2011, at 08:00, Bodoh John Robert wrote:
No save area? GET and PUT need a save area.
Well, since he doesn't modify R13, they'll user his caller's
save area. That shouldn't cause any problems. Until he tries
to return from his program.
COPYFILE START 0
YREGS
COPYFILE
On Dec 8, 2011, at 08:42, Kirk Talman wrote:
To continue learning, remove parameters from the input DCB one at a time
starting w/BLKSIZE. Then do LRECL, RECFM, DSORG. They aren't necessary
for input files.
Depends. Unlabelled tape data sets. Allocated UNIX files.
But getting them wrong is
On Dec 4, 2011, at 01:41, Rob van der Heij wrote:
Right, the linker caught me. Having an entry point R15 would be scary
;-) Sort of like naming a file -f ./ in Unix (I believe you can)
It's a valid representation not of a file name but of a directory name:
364 $ mkdir -p . -f ./
365 $ ls
On Dec 3, 2011, at 06:44, Peter Relson wrote:
I can't test it right now, but I believe that
CALL (R15),...
will cause that.
Actually:CALL R15,
For some reason, the CALL macro only special-cases (15). Everything else
produces a V-Con.
But (R15) produces the syntactically
On 12/2/2011 9:58, Martin Truebner wrote:
I can not even imagine the (weird) circumstances where such an error
would occur.
Who (in a non friday mode) would code
LR15,=V(R15)
BASR R14,R15
or what caused it?
Doesn't HLASM nowadays provide a symbol type of Register which,
if
On Nov 24, 2011, at 15:49, John Gilmore wrote:
What's past is prologue. There are historic reasons why, for example,
|termcsetc '-201'
|termaseta termc
sets terma NOT to arithmetic -201 but to arithmetic +201. If you
want to preserve algebraic values you must use the D2A and
On 11/21/2011 16:07, Patrick Roehl wrote:
I realize this thread has drifted quite a distance from Assembler as a
topic, but hoped to continue the thread until completed.
Naturally there was a snag using the C pre-processor with COBOL syntax.
One line of code in the first source module attempted
On 11/21/2011 17:36, Patrick Roehl wrote:
MOVE '??' TO QPE-SET-OPTS
Resulted in
MOVE ' TO QPE-SET-OPTS
Disabling trigraph processing indeed solved the source file molestation!
The incriminating evidence is the ??. Trigraphs are the wrong answer
to a question that should never have been
On Nov 17, 2011, at 14:35, Bernd Oppolzer wrote:
The PL/1 preprocessor is IMHO the most powerful tool to do such things,
but maybe you don't have it, if you have no PL/1 licensed.
The ASSEMBLER macro processor will not work, because you cannot
extract the result and send it to the COBOL
On Oct 14, 2011, at 12:24, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:
(someone wrote)
My understanding is that the C standard calls for all parameters
to be passed by value. My experience is that IBM's C usually
passes parameters by reference except that if a parameter is a
pointer it gets passed by value.
On Oct 14, 2011, at 14:15, McKown, John wrote:
This is just a thought that I had. I'd appreciate feedback about its utility.
HLASM currently can do some tests on symbols, such at type (T'SYMBOL) or
length (L'SYMBOL) and others. I thought it might be useful to have another
test to see if
On Oct 14, 2011, at 15:27, John Ehrman wrote:
(1) Addresses and offsets aren't known until the end of the first pass over
the source, when the values of all symbols are known. This means it's
difficult to capture the needed information in time for use by conditional
assembly.
How many passes
On Sep 16, 2011, at 06:33, David Cole wrote:
To be thorough, yes, you have to do what Ben suggests. However
depending upon your needs and depending upon how much the
consequences of being wrong matter to you, it may be sufficient to
check only the file's first record or few.
I believe Rexx,
On Sep 6, 2011, at 05:39, robin wrote:
From: glen herrmannsfeldt g...@ugcs.caltech.edu
Sent: Saturday, 3 September 2011 10:53 AM
As to programming, microcode is now usually considered
firmware, though the term is likely more recent than S/360.
The microcode of most S/360 models was
On Aug 30, 2011, at 23:29, Fred van der Windt wrote:
The comfort or discomfort of the ASSEMBLER programmers is not significant in
this context, in my believe. Due to pipelining and cache issues,
clever compilers will sooner or later outperform hand-written ASSEMBLER
programs.
The z196 is
On Aug 24, 2011, at 08:40, john gilmore wrote:
... She did not understand
The switch statement is a multi-way decision that tests whether an
expression matches one of a number of constant integer values , and branches
accordingly.
This is understandable since the switch statement, which
On Aug 16, 2011, at 05:44, Steve Comstock wrote:
-
JCL cataloged and in-stream procedures may now
have data set as DD * or DD DATA included
INCLUDE members may also contain DD * or DD DATA data
Yaaay! It's about time. Can symbol substitution be far
behind? (I fear so).
(the
On Aug 11, 2011, at 05:26, Martin Trübner wrote:
Without LE I (and anyone else) can write subroutines that work
identical if called from JCL or from another program (in VSE as
well as in MVS). All you have to do is make sure that a single
parm is prefixed with an LL field.
This is no longer
On Jul 31, 2011, at 08:20, Robin Vowels wrote:
From: Don Higgins d...@higgins.net
Sent: Sunday, 31 July 2011 8:26 PM
Do we really need any more opcodes? In college I have a faint
recollection of learning that all you need to emulate any computer is less
than 10 basic instruction types
On Jul 31, 2011, at 12:26, Binyamin Dissen wrote:
On Sun, 31 Jul 2011 11:28:23 -0600 Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com
wrote:
:The PDP-8 had no L (or equivalent) instruction. It was
:necessary to synthesize it from other instructions.
There was no native storage to register instruction
On Jul 27, 2011, at 10:45, Scott Kromarek wrote:
I am looking for a way to test a BSAM file opened in an assembler program
to determine the RECFM of the dataset. I'm pretty sure that this can be
done, but after being away from assembler coding for more than five years,
i'm more than a little
On Jul 7, 2011, at 11:57, Ray Mullins wrote:
I've also seen issues in poorly-coded macros (not mine) where use of
SYSECT in CEESTART rather than the hard-coded CSECT would avoid conflicts.
I believe if one wants to restore the entry location counter it's
better/easier to use:
SYSLOC
On 6/21/2011 5:12 PM, Tony Harminc wrote:
On 21 June 2011 18:47, Mark Boonieboo...@us.ibm.com wrote:
When did this doc change happen?
It appears it was part of SA22-7832-05, published in April 2007.
Ah yes, thank you - I see the change from improbable to will never
for opcode 00. But the
On Jun 7, 2011, at 10:27, Martin Trübner wrote:
Which one is correct?
And Johns answer: The PoP is correct.
Of course- the question itself is heresy
What would happen if, for example, the hardware designers
invented some new stack manipulations and named them PUSH
and POP?
-- gil
On Jun 6, 2011, at 10:18, Gerhard Postpischil wrote:
(my infamous example being the source for IEFSD095, the job
separator, which introduced me to BXH R5,R5, but also served as
a warning, as the author failed to take advantage of character
oriented instructions to manipulate character data).
901 - 1000 of 1089 matches
Mail list logo
