Shoot the vendor for requiring the same EP to support BALR as well as BASSM.
That is the purpose of glue routines.
Please disclosed the vendor.
On Fri, 14 Aug 2020 18:23:18 -0400 Tony Thigpen wrote:
:>I have been reading all the "that is not a good way to do it" posts, so
:>here it the
Yes. BAL from 24-bit is a special case. In amode 31, it's fine.
sas
On Sat, Aug 15, 2020 at 1:30 PM Martin Trübner wrote:
>
> >> The "special" cases, especially when R14 is loaded up separatelyWould
> you being reached by a BAL consider a special case? L
> 15,whereverI.e. BAL
cht Von: Steve Smith
Datum: 15.08.20 18:43 (GMT+01:00) An: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Betreff: Re: how to return? Let's see how good you are. Given those
requirements, the only thing your subroutine needs to do isreturn with BSM
0,R14. It will do the right thing in every cas
Given those requirements, the only thing your subroutine needs to do is
return with BSM 0,R14. It will do the right thing in every case you
mentioned.
As you didn't originally specify much of this, we had to qualify answers
with various unlikely scenarios. Fact is, BSM 0,R14 works correctly for
Tony,
>> 14) And to make it even more challenging, the code *must* run in a older
>> processor that does not support branch-retaliative nor BAKR/PR
>> instructions.
Where would someone find such a processor?
Facts are:
1.) BAKR/PR are around for very long time.
2.) The stack needs an
I didn't follow the whole discussion, but I now got interested because
of the challenge and
then I looked (again) at the original solution. IMO, the original
solution is very elegant and
solves the problem. I don't see any problem with it.
In contrast, at a former customer of mine, where we
on.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List on behalf of
Tony Thigpen
Sent: Friday, August 14, 2020 6:23 PM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: how to return? Let's see how good you are.
I have been reading all the "that is
6:23 PM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: how to return? Let's see how good you are.
I have been reading all the "that is not a good way to do it" posts, so
here it the challenge to all those nay-sayers.
It's time to 'put-up' or 'shut-up'.
Under the following conditions
I have been reading all the "that is not a good way to do it" posts, so
here it the challenge to all those nay-sayers.
It's time to 'put-up' or 'shut-up'.
Under the following conditions, just how would you code it?
Rules:
1) You are coding the entry and exit for a called subroutine. For this
