I am delighted to see that my posts are read. Let's agree that it should be one of STM|STMH|STMG|STMY .
On 2/10/12, Steve Comstock <st...@trainersfriend.com> wrote: > On 2/10/2012 7:40 AM, John Gilmore wrote: >> Yes, indeed. I should have proofed my post. Still, the substance of >> what I wanted to say is not much affected by the fact that 'SR' should >> have been 'SM'. > > Or maybe 'STM' :-) > > >> >> On 2/10/12, John P Kalinich<jkali...@csc.com> wrote: >>> John Gilmore of the IBM Mainframe Assembler List >>> <ASSEMBLER-LIST@listserv.uga.edu> wrote on 02/10/2012 07:52:18 AM: >>> >>>> Comments are or, better, should be of two sorts: >>>> >>>> 1) Substantial prefixed blocks of text, often several hundred lines of >>>> them, that describe what will be done and how it will be done, and >>>> explicate coding conventions for parameters, and >>>> >>>> 2) comments following single instructions, 'remarks'. >>>> >>>> A comment like 'store registers' attached to an SR instruction is worse >>> than useless. >>> >>> Agree, since SR is 'subtract' not 'store'. >>> >>> Regards, >>> John K >>> >> >> >> -- >> John Gilmore, Ashland, MA 01721 - USA >> > > > -- > > Kind regards, > > -Steve Comstock > The Trainer's Friend, Inc. > > 303-355-2752 > http://www.trainersfriend.com > > * To get a good Return on your Investment, first make an investment! > + Training your people is an excellent investment > > * Try our tool for calculating your Return On Investment > for training dollars at > http://www.trainersfriend.com/ROI/roi.html > -- John Gilmore, Ashland, MA 01721 - USA
