That's great! Explaining things like "ST USING
STATUS_TABLE+4000,STATUS_DESC+4000 " makes people suspect me of witchcraft.
sas
We have just shipped the PTFs for APAR PH42050 which allows a
dependent USING instruction to be resolved using a 20-bit signed
displacement provided that the specified OPTABLE is one which
supports instructions with that capability.
It was apparently intended that this support should have been
gil writes:
>Also, decades ago, I found that (something like):
>PSWMAP DSECT
> ...
> USING PSWMAP-SVCOPSW,R0
>
>quietly behaved as if I had coded:
> USING PSWMAP,R0
>
>Experts conceded that the behavior is indefensible except
>on grounds of compatibility with existing
On Nov 17, 2021, at 02:36:12, Jonathan Scott wrote:
> ...
> When we resumed this item recently, we found that the logic to
> handle the dependent USING base address and range in the Using
> Map and Active Usings headings incorrectly assumed that any
> dependent USING would be basing the start
Ref: Your note of Wed, 17 Nov 2021 09:17:36 -0700
gil writes:
> Does that affect generated code, or even ASMADATA? Might
> any users depend on the misbehavior?
The Active Usings headings and the Using Map are just additional
information in the listing (and ADATA) so any errors in the code
to
I am not the least bit familiar with it but it looks pretty bleak:
https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/hla-and-tf/1.6?topic=tool-restrictions
I think I have a Windows XP install diskette if you want to borrow it.
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List
I just downloaded the "latest" version of ASMPUT from z/OS 2.3 and have
some questions.
First off, let me say this is an 'experiment' to see if it would have
caught a couple of bugs I found caused by copy/paste errors.
The first thing that caught my eye in reading the HLASM 1.6 documentation
was
