I think that there are [at least] two usefully separated issues here.
I looked yesterday at a macro definition I wrote 16 years ago that I
still use but had not updated in the interval. As a part of its
bullet-proofing it conditionally removes some framing single quotes
from input values in the
On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 08:51:34 -0500, John Gilmore jwgli...@gmail.com wrote:
I come now to Tony Harminc's example:
begin extract
But SETRP generates a NOPR with an expression (related to the SDWA, I think)
obviously intended (and I think commented) to fail if the length is
not 0. However HLASM
Walt,
I am not sure that we can resolve this difference of opinion.
As you know from the character of my posts over the years, I am not
anti-IBM; and neither do I want to hold it to impossibly high
standards.
IBM code has always contained some errors. How not? In the past,
however, these
Which adds to the need, IMO, for customers to have access to the PL/AS
compiler. Or for IBM to write a PL/AS structure to C struct transformer.
Not that it would help me, what with my lack of a C license.
--
For IBM-MAIN
On 3 Mar 2013 10:43:30 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main John McKown
wrote:
Which adds to the need, IMO, for customers to have access to the PL/AS
compiler. Or for IBM to write a PL/AS structure to C struct transformer.
Not that it would help me, what with my lack of a C license.
Not just PL/AS to
Paul Gilmartin wrote
breaks commonly used conventions or newer HLASM functions
(e.g. SETRP),
Can you be more specific?
It's pretty likely that SETRP did not break anything (unless it was 30
years ago). I could easily believe that some things might not work with
newer HLASM functions (but I'm
On 2 March 2013 20:16, Peter Relson rel...@us.ibm.com wrote:
Paul Gilmartin wrote
breaks commonly used conventions or newer HLASM functions
(e.g. SETRP),
Actually Iwrote that bit, so putting Paul in the subject line was even
worse... :-)
Can you be more specific?
I'm at home, so not as
On 3/2/2013 5:50 PM, Tony Harminc wrote:
Fair enough. But I think of my code as including those documented
and common IBM macros. If I have to choose between not using SETRP and
giving the assembler enough info to help diagnose some of my finger
checks, well of course I have to use SETRP.
