Re: Redesigning the Principles of Operation Manual

On 2014-11-13, at 14:48, John Ehrman wrote: As others have noted, the PoP is quite large and dense. Changing the formatting would be a significant effort. The z Architects are always very busy, and I suspect would have difficulty finding resources needed to adopt any of the suggestions

Re: Redesigning the Principles of Operation Manual

On 2014-11-14 11:17, Gary Weinhold wrote: You know we're all just talking about presentation of information, not the information itself. So what we want is a flexible (tailorable?) interface to the information, not a change in the information itself. So with all the advances made in user

Re: Redesigning the Principles of Operation Manual

On 2014-11-16, at 14:09, zMan wrote: Sorry you think it makes no sense. It makes lots of sense to those of us who have to use it a lot for more than just reading random documents. And it sure PRETENDS to be a lot more than just a way to PRINT a document (and even then, it's hardly as portable

Multiple address spaces (was: Redesigning ... )

On 2014-11-17, at 08:05, Tom Marchant wrote: On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 18:31:23 -0500, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote: I have often thought it was a mistaken design by IBM that prohibits non-authorized programmers from exploiting multiple address spaces and instruction-level space-switching

Multiple address spaces (was: Redesigning ... )

On 2014-11-17, at 08:44, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote: Not that I expect any of the current design to ever change of course. It is now written in stone. Unix programming fork capabilities, shared memory objects and mutex signaling mechanisms provide some of the functional capabilities I

Re: Multiple address spaces (was: Redesigning ... )

On 2014-11-17, at 09:27, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote: Not quite. At least once upon a time, adding users to z/VM was an authorized function. At that time you could not create one or more userid's in which to run disconnected VM's (DVM's) to act as your servers without authorization.

Re: Redesigning the Principles of Operation Manual

On 2014-11-16, at 15:43, Robin Vowels wrote: HTML isn't something that a manual should be in. It almost never prints properly (prints half-lines etc), doesn't have organised page numbers or index, etc etc. Line lengths and page numbers are matters of presentation, not semantics. Tim

Re: Replication factor of a group item

On 2014-11-26, at 18:16, John Ehrman wrote: Micheal, Could you write DS 0CL(11*133) ? I had thought length was limited to 256 (SS instruuction count or control block field?), but I'm often wrong about HLASM. -- gil

Re: Replication factor of a group item

On 2014-11-27, at 10:43, John Gilmore wrote: No, Paul, the maximal length value that can be specified in a DS instruction for character (C) or hexadecimal (x) values is 65534. Your maximum does, however, apply to DC assembler instructions. Go figger. Is this, then perhaps a Binder TXT

Re: CONVTOD/STCKCONV and actual clock resolution

On 2014-12-03, at 06:13, Peter Relson wrote: Support in STCKCONV and TIME for this sort of functionality might show up down the road. What about time zones, DST, and leap seconds in STCKCONV, and CONVTOD? It's straining out a gnat and swallowing a camel to provide microsecond or

Re: 8 character mnemonics

On 2015-01-21, at 08:37, David Cole wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong (John Ehrman), but I thought that IBM once upon a time, way back when they started to create mnemonics longer than 5 characters... I thought they said their new limit was going to be seven characters. Well... VSTRCZFS.

Re: 8 character mnemonics

On 2015-01-21 12:03, John Ehrman wrote: Paul Gilmartin asked... But are new mnemonics vetted against all member names in all maclibs of all IBM products? (Do significant ISVs count?) That was indeed done many moons ago, but the number of products with private macro libraries grew far

Re: 8 character mnemonics

On 2015-01-22, at 06:54, Tony Thigpen wrote: I have used longer-than-8 macros for many years. Works great. I have one source macro that I include at the top of the member that is just 8 characters long. Inside, it has many macro 'redefs' so that I can use a long macro name in the code, but

Re: An Interesting Technique

On 2015-02-16, at 05:32, mar...@pi-sysprog.de wrote: Can you imagine my surprise, when I found code (in an untouched subroutine) that relied on some register in the MIDDLE of the routine (3500 lines of code) to be the same as it was, when the calling routine was left. I had to use PER SLIP

Re: One more second

On 2015-01-06, at 10:01, Paul Saers wrote: Hello friends. A new year and IERS has already sent out a note about a new leap second to be added. Beloe a CP from IERS: A positive leap second will be introduced at the end of June 2015. The sequence of dates of the UTC second markers will be:

Re: LZRG??? Does this mean that 56-bit addressing is a thing?

On 2015-03-11, at 08:49, John McKown wrote: And POPCNT is another one. Why do I need to know the number of 1 bits in each individual byte in a GPR? Because CDC had it first? I suspect that it became a built-in function in Pascal, CARD(), because Pascal was developed on a CDC which had the

(Regular Expressions followup)

Please don't followup with subject ...Digest... On 2015-03-23, at 06:53, John Walker wrote: Regular expressions is the most god-awful piece of clap-trap garbage I have ever laid my eyes on. Yeah for you PC programmers! Groans of disbelief from us mainframe programmers at the obtuse,

Re: Assembler Syntax - was (Regular Expressions followup)

On 2015-03-23 16:32, Gord Tomlin wrote: On 2015-03-23 15:11, Blaicher, Christopher Y. wrote (snipped): Now it would be nice to be able to indicate a new format by using RECFM=V/VB/VBS It would be nice to be able to indicate a new format, but not by tying the format to an attribute of the

Re: HLASM Syntax (was (Regular Expressions followup))

On 2015-03-23 12:57, John Ehrman wrote: John McKown would like... The only enhancement that I, personally, would like would be for free format input into HLASM with _no_ line limits. ... HLASM used to ship an input exit (ASMAXINV) that accepts variable-length input records. Check the

Re: Option to Prevent Data Loss Due to Truncation of Nominal Value

On 2015-04-30, at 16:23, Ed Jaffe wrote: A working program had the following code: 018000 MVC 0(8,R1),=CL8'EJESPOP' Set command name 018010 MVC 8(8,R1),=CL8'PATHNAME'Set command parameter An overzealous programmer, trying to be helpful, changed it to:

Re: Lower case csect/entry names

On 2015-05-05 18:00, Russ Teubner (HostBridge) wrote: I just completed an assembler program that will be linked with a c program. The objective of the assembler program is to perform SRB/zIIP-enabled socket i/o for the c program. I would like the csect and entry names in the assembler

Re: USING 0,0

On 2015-05-18, at 06:28, Tom Marchant wrote: What are you trying to accomplish? There are three forms of USING, and all three require an address as the first operand. This is given as a label ... IIRC, the HLASM Reference says something such as that the first operand must be an address

Re: absolute addressing

On 2015-05-18, at 08:30, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote: Someone from Tachyonsoft has told me the answer, though I am still not sure that I understand it. It goes like: XXX START 1000 USING XXX,0 In the usual case, the displacement is computed by subtracting the desired offset

Re: Rounding to a 2G-byte boundary

On 2015-06-25 16:00, Mark Boonie wrote: However, I can't specify the boundary as a symbol equated to 2G (e.g., SEGTBLRANGE EQU X'8000') without getting an assembler error due to an overflow in an intermediate value. Does anyone have any alternative ways It's not an intermediate

Re: Assembler exercise - MAX of two or more equates

On 2015-06-22 11:45, Walt Farrell wrote: On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 07:26:10 -0700, Ed Jaffe wrote: On 6/17/2015 2:55 PM, David Cole wrote: Excellent! Just stuff that into an ignorable dsect, and there you go! I never thought of this method. Very creative. We use the same basic technique in a

Re: Rounding to a 2G-byte boundary

On 2015-06-26, at 21:06, Steve Smith wrote: Out of curiosity, what is this 2gb boundary needed for (at assembly time)? It would be a lot easier to calculate at run-time. It's harder at assembly time only because of an archaic assembler, circumvented by deferring the calculation to run

Re: *+n branches

On 2015-07-03, at 09:55, Robin Vowels wrote: From: Gary Weinhold Sent: Friday, July 03, 2015 10:46 PM We have ended up with many of these in our code because a senior developer felt that too many single-usage labels cluttered the code and made it less readable. (He also required that

Re: *+n branches

On 2015-07-02 17:13, Bob Rutledge wrote: The fastest branch is the one not taken. Hmmm... Not necessarily. It's been discussed among these pages that the zSeries branch prediction logic assumes for most branches that the branch will less often be taken, and optimizes for the not taken case.

Re: LOADING An AMODE64 Program

On 2015-08-20, at 05:39, Peter Relson wrote: Does this mean that one can't create a data module to be loaded above-the-bar? One must obtain STORAGE and copy into it? Can one IDENTIFY an address above- the-bar? No to all three. You can create a data module to be loaded above the bar.

Re: LOADING An AMODE64 Program

On 2015-08-18, at 03:25, Binyamin Dissen wrote: On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:02:58 -0600 Paul Gilmartin 0014e0e4a59b-dmarc-requ...@listserv.uga.edu wrote: :(Might one declare a data-only module as RMODE(64) AMODE(24) so :it may be loaded above the bar, but so LOAD returns an unbiased

Re: LOADING An AMODE64 Program

On 2015-08-11, at 07:50, Tom Marchant wrote: On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 08:46:39 -0400, Peter Relson wrote: If that is then used with LLGF this will be a branch to an odd address and a specification exception will result. You lost me with that one Peter. Given all of these conditions: 1. A

Re: posix time epoch

On 2015-10-29, at 11:08, Dave Rivers wrote: > I think your number is a little off, or at least different... > > I’ve been told that according to the Time Protocol in RFC 868, the value > is -2208988800. Not sure where the extra 10 seconds is coming from. Leap > seconds were not announced until

Subscripting a literal

In a macro, the following works OK: Loc Object CodeAddr1 Addr2 Stmt Source Statement HLASM R6.0 2015/10/29 13.44 F2 F3E7 D0D0 D118 000D0 00118 146+ UNPK (15),PK(8) ... where

Re: Subscripting a literal

On 2015-10-29 14:42, Steve Smith wrote: > Like HLASM, I'm not clear on what you want to do. But (8) means > that you want the 8th element of a sublisted parameter named , > which it ain't. If the (8) is supposed to be a length override, precede it > with a dot. > Thanks. Yes, I intended a

Re: TOD conversion to display

On 2015-11-16, at 08:57, Victor Gil wrote: > Besides, the TIME macro generates non-reentrant code which under CICS I'd > have to make reentrant by moving its parms into the "working storage", which > the subroutine just can't afford to getmain+freemain > Doesn't STCK also require "working

Re: TOD conversion to display

On 2015-11-16, at 10:17, Gary Weinhold wrote: > Depending on how long the process runs and you're concerned that it will > start before midnight and end after, you could force an EXEC CICS call if > TIME is > 23:59. So there'd be a few higher overhead calls right around > midnight. > If

Re: TOD conversion to display

On 2015-11-16, at 15:19, Dougie Lawson wrote: > Rather than re-inventing a wheel why not use the Language Environment > callable service CEELOCT (get current local date or time) > https://www-01.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSLTBW_2.1.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r1.ceea300/clcloct.htm%23clcloct?lang=en >

Re: TOD conversion to display

On 2015-11-17, at 08:21, Victor Gil wrote: > I guess you missed the whole point of not calling a supplied callable service > ... > > Regarding STCKF - this is indeed a great tip and I'd probably consider using > it except we have to use STCK anyway [along with the LPAR id extracted once >

Re: TOD conversion to display

On 2015-11-17, at 06:16, Steve Smith wrote: > I have a program that converts a STCK to a WTO. It is reentrant, but you > will need writable storage for the displayable string. Samples: > > +TODCON2 TOD= DATE= 9/17/2042, TIME= 23:53:47.370495 > +TODCON2 TOD=CFDCC9B74A2892CB

Re: Moves and others

On 2015-10-15, at 07:14, John McKown wrote: > > ​I've sometimes thought that it would have been better if the length field > in the MVC was actually the number of bytes to move. Which would make a > length of zero essentially be a "no-op". But would be more intuitive. And > make it easier to put

Re: Not getting the concept

On 2015-10-08, at 08:48, Peter Relson wrote: > ... > Consider > -- Module A is using 64-bit GRs (whether AMODE 64 or not) and expects > anything it calls to comply with the linkage conventions > -- Module A calls Module B > -- Module B is AMODE 31, knows nothing about 64-bit GRs so

Re: Moves and others

On 2015-10-15, at 10:58, Gary Weinhold wrote: > I seem to recall when COBOL first started to compile to MVCL, Amdahl SEs > zapped it to an MVC loop and greatly improved COBOL performance. Or > something like that... > ... and the entire loop might have fit in no more bytes of code than were

Re: Moves and others

On 2015-10-15, at 08:48, Robin Vowels wrote: > > IBM should have produced a special EXC instruction for characters, > that did what EX does, but accepts k, the number of bytes to move (or > compare, etc), > tests for zero (and performs a no-op if it is), subtracts 1, and then > executes MVC. >

Re: Moves and others

On 2015-10-15, at 10:45, John McKown wrote: > > ​I had some "weird" assembler code which "optimized" something like that > long ago. I did a complicated series of test and ended with a CC for ==0 or > <0 or >0. I then used the IPM instruction to save the CC in a general > register. Later, I did

Re: Moves and others

On 2015-10-15, at 16:01, David de Jongh wrote: > The problem I found was that overlapping moves (to perform array > initialization, for example) no longer worked. I (and no doubt many others) > flew into a rage after looking at the object code and realizing that there > was no test for the

Re: BXLE considered harmful

On 2015-10-10, at 00:09, Robin Vowels wrote: > > Well, you can always use MH, but it won't overflow. > Oh, it overflows; it's just not reported. I've always believed that STH should set overflow if bits 0-15 are not sign extension of bit 16. I've used MH; SLA 16 and M; SLDA 32 to detect

Re: TOD conversion to display

On 2015-11-18, at 10:08, Tom Marchant wrote: > On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 10:00:21 -0700, Paul Gilmartin <paulgboul...@aim.com> > wrote: > >> one institution overcame a disadvantage >> by introducing a wire(!) delay line to delay its competitor's transactions >> by a

Re: review my program?

On 2015-12-09, at 09:59, David Cole wrote: > > That may work if your load module consists of only a single csect. If you > start building multi-csect load modules, then it won't work at all, since > your method can provide only the length of that single csect. > > If you want to find the

Re: One Byte MVC Versus IC/STC

On 2015-12-16 12:10, David S. wrote: > > Nevertheless, IC/STC is what the newer mainframe compilers generate for a > one-byte move. For the reasons given, it's less work for the system than > an MVC. > For fortuitous alignment, is L; STC better? I'm confident that for adverse alignment L is no

Re: Use of LQ results in ASMA080E?!

On 2016-01-05, at 06:14, Peter Relson wrote: > > We have never, to my knowledge, encountered any downside to using GOFF. Is > there any? > Cross-assembling for non-IBM OSes on non-IBM hardware. (But that doesn't concern you.) It may even be necessary to drop back to Linkage Editor because

Re: Use of LQ results in ASMA080E?!

On 2016-01-05, at 09:49, mar...@pi-sysprog.de wrote: > > let me see if i have this right- > > one can use the HLASM on z/OS (it's there anyway) and > Or, they'll sell you an assembler that runs on most desktops and you don't even need z/OS. C compiler, too. > then use your "binder/linker" to

Re: Use of LQ results in ASMA080E?!

On 2016-01-06, at 11:40, McNeill,Cliff wrote: > From JCL Reference, DD Stmt, DLM parameter > > Use the DLM parameter to specify a delimiter to terminate this in-stream data > set. When the DLM parameter assigns a different delimiter, the in-stream data > records can include standard

Re: Use of LQ results in ASMA080E?!

On 2016-01-06, at 09:22, Tom Marchant wrote: > On Wed, 6 Jan 2016 09:14:03 -0700, Paul Gilmartin wrote: > >> On 2016-01-06, at 08:53, Tom Marchant wrote: >> >>> On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 15:46:09 -0700, Paul Gilmartin wrote: >>> >>>> one can not

Re: Use of LQ results in ASMA080E?!

On 2016-01-05 12:35, Ed Jaffe wrote: > > I agree it would be nice to be able to insert a job step on the z/OS side to > transform a GOFF object into something consumable by z/VSE -- either object > deck or phase. > HLASM can generate either GOFF or traditional object format. You need GOFF

Re: Use of LQ results in ASMA080E?!

On 2016-01-05 13:45, Abe Kornelis wrote: > > As I read it, you could even use z390 (supported on any Java platform) > to create an object deck, then pass that as input to Dave's binder/linker. > > Am I right, Dave? > Re-replying to ASSEMBLER-LIST. Did't notice that you had set "Reply-to"

Re: Use of LQ results in ASMA080E?!

On 2016-01-05 13:57, Dave Rivers wrote: > > Oh yes - there are several situations in GOFF that don’t translate. > > In some cases there would be a warning/error. > > But, for some situations if we’re doing the ‘linking’ - we can just handle > it. > Doesn't work if SMP/E packaging is

Re: BPAM multiple members/one DCB and EODAD exit?

On 2016-01-08 15:30, Thomas David Rivers wrote: > I'm having a heck of a time reading multiple members > from the same BPAM DCB... but not sequentially, trying > to "skip around" in the members (for example, read one block of > MEM1, one block of MEM2, back to MEM1 to read the next block, > back

Re: Use of LQ results in ASMA080E?!

On 2015-12-28, at 18:41, Lizette Koehler wrote: > Would it make more sense to change 0CL512 to 0LQ32 ? > > Does the 0CL512 place it on a quad word boundary? > Are you suggesting that AIADSECT is guaranteed to be on a doubleword boundary, but not on a quadword, so the number of possible slack

Re: SDSF Command Line Width

On 2015-11-25, at 17:21, Robert Ngan wrote: > The '/' panel is only for extended operator command input, not (stacked) > ISPF commands. > And yes, I had my own customized ISFPCU41 panel that expanded the command > field, but the response I got back from IBM indicated that SDSF was not > coded to

Re: Change in GETMAIN behavior

On 2015-11-19, at 11:03, Elardus Engelbrecht wrote: > Tony Harminc wrote: > >> One slighly related point: It has been the case from day 1 of MVS (OS/VS2 >> R2) that even though GETMAIN can give out non-zeroed storage, that storage >> will never contain data left over from another address

Re: Change in GETMAIN behavior

On 2015-11-23, at 03:40, Elardus Engelbrecht wrote: > Jim Mulder wrote: > >> IGVINITGETMAIN is the TRAP name. It was designed and implemented as a one >> person, unfunded, spare time project, by me, to meet some my needs for >> testing purposes. > > Wow! That is a worthwhile achievement!

Re: EQUATE symbol

On 2016-05-30, at 10:14, michealbutz wrote: > > 016682774=WS_LEN EQU *-WS_DSECT > 0016680 01670 2775 HRTCPRD RSECT > 001668 2776 WS_LENGTH DC A(WS_LEN) > ** ASMA032E Relocatable value

Re: Please use meaningful subject (was: ASSEMBLER-LIST Digest - 6 Jun 2016 to 20 Jun 2016 (#2016-62))

On 2016-06-22, at 00:50, Rob van der Heij wrote: > > An interesting idea might be to sign up for the web interface at > listserv.uga.edu and use that to respond to the individual post, instead of > trying to reply to the digest mail. Even when you modify the subject, your > response would not

Re: LLILF/LGFI and ad-cons

On 2016-06-20, at 09:05, John McKown wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 9:59 AM, John McKown wrote: > >>> Why shouldn't this be allowed: >>> >>> 0182 294 LLILF >>> R15,V(BPX4GUI) GET THE EPA >>> ASMA044E Undefined symbol - V >>> ASMA173S

Arbitrary string in SYSPARM (or alternative?)

In a current thread on IBM-MAIN, the OP wants to "Convert a Parm into a control card". Various answers have been tendered, Rexx, DFSORT, ..., and mine in Assembler: //STEP EXEC PGM=ASMA90, (HLASM) // PARM='SYSPARM(Isn''t the &?)' //SYSLINDD SYSOUT=B //SYSIN DD * SETC

Re: Arbitrary string in SYSPARM (or alternative?)

On 2016-02-03, at 07:20, rkueb...@tsys.com wrote: > In our portfolio of small utilities is a program that by its name prefix I > can tell is over 30 yrs old. It simply opens a file and writes the parm > to a record in the file w/LRECL=80. > So many installations have such that it's

Re: Using macro to set assembler option

On 2016-02-16, at 07:17, Peter Relson wrote: > > Perhaps I'm forgetting something, but IIRC, as far as the binder and z/OS > itself is concerned, RSECT matters only for CSECTs in IEANUCxx where they > are put into the read-only nucleus. It is ignored for all other > situations. > Isn't there

Re: Using macro to set assembler option

On 2016-02-16, at 22:38, Jim Mulder wrote: > > REFRPROT in PROGxx causes REFR load modules and program objects > to be loaded into key 0 storage, and the full 4K pages are page > protected. RSECT is not involved. I would expect that the > individual unprivileged programmer has control over

Re: Using macro to set assembler option

On 2016-02-17 10:38, Jim Mulder wrote: > > The administrator should be specifying REFRPROT in PROGxx. > The only reason we made it an option was concern that an installation > might have self-modifying programs which were incorrectly had the > REFR attribute, and we didn't want that to be a

Re: Dynamic datasets

On 2016-03-18, at 13:15, rkueb...@tsys.com wrote: > SVC99 > Among the unlikely "Authorized Assembler Services". The mention of "&&" (mis-)led me to believe it was JCL. I believe JCL requires a DDNAME. With Rexx BPXWDYN I can omit DSN and DD and a generated DD of the form SYSn is returned

Re: Generating warning for AL2 expression truncation?

On 2016-03-28, at 16:18, Ngan, Robert wrote: > For non-relocatable values, the range of Y values is the same as a signed > halfword. > In my case, I want unsigned values so I can't use Y. > I ended up coding: > > DCAL2(expr) > DS0XL(65536-expr) ASSERT: expr was not

Re: Microprocessor Optimization Primer

On 2016-04-05, at 10:00, Swarbrick, Frank wrote: > Can I infer from this that XR/XGR, all else being equal, is to be preferred > (slightly) over LHI/LGHI? > If so, why might that be? I would have thought the one that doesn't touch > the CC would be "more efficient" than the one that does. > Or

Re: Dynamic datasets

On 2016-03-18, at 14:07, Dougie Lawson wrote: > I'd suggest looking at BPXWDYN as it's easier to call that than set-up all > the gubbins needed to use SVC99. > Is RTDDN supported when BPXWDYN is called from Assembler? I've used it only in Rexx. BPXWDYN is described in the unlikely Rexx for

Re: IBM Diassembler

On 2016-08-17, at 08:40, Tony Harminc wrote: > On 16 August 2016 at 19:01, Joseph Reichman wrote: > >> Can the IBM disassembler be invoked By a another method then submitting a job > > TSO CALL command... From a CLIST or REXX program. > Or, from Rexx, ADDRESS LINKMVS

Re: HLASM anomaly

On 2017-02-23, at 23:26, Webster, Chris wrote: > HLASM correctly refers to POPs since it is not describing each instruction. > POPs uses 'treated as' for describing different operands. The term 'treated > as' is used frequently with different instructions and appears to accurately >

Re: HLASM anomaly

On 2017-02-23, at 23:54, John Dravnieks wrote: > > Unless the assembler is redesigned to use just one expression processor, > there will always be differences in between instruction operands and DC > operands > I see little value in attempting to eliminate that difference and much value in

Re: HLASM anomaly

On 2017-02-23, at 07:57, Steve Thompson wrote: > Ah, I see why you all are having a problem with this. > > And me, being an old ALC programmer, this is intuitively obvious. In fact, > there are several changes to HLASM that I disagreed with, because they then > caused programs I had written

Re: HLASM anomaly

On 2017-02-23, at 10:31, Steve Thompson wrote: >>> >> Informative? Or Warning? Do you then disagree with warnings on >> multiple base-displacement resolutions? > > I sometimes run into this, and can't figure out why the assembler even issued > the message. But when it happens I do verify that

Re: HLASM anomaly

On 2017-02-23, at 11:16, Paul Gilmartin wrote: > > What are the limits on the operand of AHI? What of: > > AEQU -32768 > DC Y(A) > AHI R1,AOK, I believe. > > BEQU 32767 > DC Y(B) > AHI R1,BOK, I bel

Re: Friday puzzle: CNOP 1,2

On 2016-08-19 16:01, Ngan, Robert wrote: > I wanted the length aligned on the odd byte, so the immediately following > (labeled) string was on a halfword boundary and could therefore be referenced > using a LARL. > How about: DSCAllow at least one byte DS0H

Re: HLASM anomaly

enerates x'00F9' Would you have it otherwise? > Paul Gilmartin---How do you feel about AHI 1,X'00' >... > Yes, AHI 1,65535 is valid > And here, I part company with HLASM, or at least with its Reference. PoOps states that the operand of AHI is "taken as" a 16-bit s

Re: Friday puzzle: CNOP 1,2

On 2016-08-23, at 10:21, Ngan, Robert wrote: > Hmm, there's always something new to learn with the assembler. I've never > encountered the boundary and offset operands of ORG. That's useful to know > for future coding. > The only thing that ORG doesn't do vs. DC is emit the potential filler

Re: Printing macro expansion?

On 2016-09-14 17:27, Hardee, Chuck wrote: > Try "COPYing" the macro into your program so that the macro source is listed. > That may be enough to get to the bottom of it. > If I have the source, I can inspect it without "COPYing" it/ > What line 72 in the macro? > In fact, it's obvious to me

Printing macro expansion?

I have in SYSPRINT: Loc Object CodeAddr1 Addr2 Stmt Source Statement 1 * 2 PRINT MCALL,MSOURCE 3 MyMacro ** ASMA144E Begin-to-continue columns not blank -

Re: SRST Performance (was: converting character to packed

On 2016-10-18, at 13:45, Tony Harminc wrote: > > There is also the long-known performance problem with TRT (and TR) > that its definition requires that "Access exceptions are recognized > only for those bytes in the second operand which are actually > required. Access exceptions are not

Re: converting character to packed

On 2016-10-18, at 13:19, Tony Harminc wrote: > On 18 October 2016 at 02:34, wrote: >> Using TR in a different way omits the commas and decimal point, sign, >> and any other funny characters. >> To do this, you swap the roles of the translate table and the string >> being

Re: converting character to packed

On 2016-10-23, at 06:05, robi...@dodo.com.au wrote: > Monetary fields tend to have the finny characters in known positions, > commas (or periods)every third position. The decimal point (period or > comma) also is in a fixed position.All these are in fixed positions > relative to the least

Re: SRST Performance (was: converting character to packed

On 2016-10-18, at 10:11, Martin Truebner wrote: > > TRT does a lockup for each and every char until terminating char is > found or the maximum length is reached- the lockup is done against a > table of 256 char. > Caching helps a lot. How can the programmer insure that the table occupies the

Re: Rif: Re: EXECUTE Instruction and location of its target instruction

On 2016-11-23 07:19, aldo.cro...@csebo.it wrote: > I think it is appropriate to use a EXRL (execute remote) intest a EX. > I also think that it is appropriate to place the subject of education > execute close to the EX, preferably after a statement of unconditional > branch. > Is it recommended

Re: Using ORG like CNOP

On 2016-11-27, at 18:14, Charles Mills wrote: > I have a DSECT where I want to define a fullword such that the next address > after the fullword will be on a doubleword boundary. I would like the > alignment to be independent of the preceding alignment (be change-proof). > How about?:

Re: ASMA435I

On 2016-11-27, at 08:58, Steve Thompson wrote: > ... > As a result, it knows from where the macros come from that you specify in > your assembly because that is a very static situation, unless you decide to > use HLASM exits in a "strange" way to inject code into the stream. > IIRC, using those

Re: ASMA435I

On 2016-11-27, at 11:09, Steve Thompson wrote: > Yes, that did not exist when I was doing all that. And I have not looked at > the exit doc for HLASM for several years now. So I can't speak to the Unix > I/O control block interface. > It must have major/minor device numbers plus I-number

Re: Using ORG like CNOP

On 2016-11-28, at 06:46, aldo.cro...@csebo.it wrote: > Ds 0d is sufficient in data area. > But it doesn't leave room for the fullword. On 2016-11-28, at 06:39, Jonathan Scott wrote: > > > Here's a general solution which I mentioned on this list earlier > this year (in the thread

Re: Question on using DYNALLOC

On 2016-11-11, at 08:52, Steve Thompson wrote: > > But, might I suggest that you do the member name in lower case? That way, you > can see it, and I think ISPF will allow you to view/edit it if you need to > while fixing a problem if your JOB fails for any reason. > Ah, but what if the

Re: Question on using DYNALLOC

(In my earlier suggestion, I neglected to supply an LMMREP before the LMCLOSE) On 2016-11-11, at 09:43, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote: > > But I agree, lower case would be the cleaner solution. One suitably arranged > TR does it. Can't use XOR of 8X'40' on the name to convert upper case to >

Re: Question on using DYNALLOC

On 2016-11-11, at 15:05, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote: > I think I really meant to day AND 8X'BF' rather than XOR 8X'40'; in other > words just turn OFF the X'40' bit to convert upper to lower case. > > But of course that is also not a good idea when digits or national characters > are involved.

Re: converting character to packed

On 2016-10-13, at 09:25, John P. Hartmann wrote: > You did not say that is what you want, but then I didn't notice which forum > you wrote to, so mea culpa. > > Anyhow, if your computer runs VM, you don't have to write assembler at all > (and if it runs MVS, make your requirement known to

ASMA435I

A couple recent threads on IBM-MAIN asked, "How can I tell where my load module came from?" and "How can a Rexx EXEC know where it came from?" The consensus (I call it a consensus because I joined it) is that it's damned hard. Once a library is OPENed there's little information but the DEB which

Re: How to separate instructions and data generated in macro?

On 2017-01-13, at 09:27, Peter Hunkeler wrote: > > Although that code is never used in perfomance critical environments, I now > want to separate instructions and data, just for the fun of it,to avoid cache > trashing. > I'll second John's suggestion of LOCTR. Same CSECT, but remote. You may

Re: How to separate instructions and data generated in macro?

On 2017-01-13, at 14:00, Tony Thigpen wrote: > Although I used LOCTR extensively in my programs, I also use the save area > (r13) as a work area for small home-grown macros. (As long as the code in the > macro does not call something that saves/restores in the save area.) > Extend the save

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >