I think it may have been an parody of a joke:
Question: "How much money is enough?"
Answer: "Just a little bit more."

In assembler, it is "how many bytes do you need to be resolvable to a valid 
offset?" "just a few more."

It's why I (as a customer only), love doing "baseless" programming. I separate 
the code and data sections, using a base register only for the data section. I 
load the base register using an LAY (if contained in the same CSECT). I now 
also use "pure" coding techniques. In this case "pure" means that I never store 
into the CSECT itself. Actually, I use an RSECT. This is a requirement for 
writing DLLs in HLASM. Which I have successfully done ("beause I can").

--
John McKown
Systems Engineer IV
IT

Administrative Services Group

HealthMarkets(r)

9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010
(817) 255-3225 phone *
john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com


Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or 
proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact 
the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. 
HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the 
insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance 
Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The 
MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM

> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List
> [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of robin
> Sent: Monday, June 04, 2012 5:20 AM
> To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Base registers
>
> From: Rob van der Heij
> Sent: Monday, 4 June 2012 4:41 PM
>
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:45 AM, robin <robi...@dodo.com.au> wrote:
>
> >> There's no need to be scared of an odd value.
> >> It is, after all, the assembler that calculates displacements.
> >> If it bothers you, make it 4092.  Still no extra
> instruction needed.
>
> >Since most of the time you just new a few more bytes anyway ;-)
>
> Even with the nonsense word changed a la Martin,
> your response still doesn't make sense.
>
>

Reply via email to