The terminator is specified in R0. It could be anything - want to parse CSV data?
...chris. -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of Paul Raulerson Sent: February-08-18 2:46 PM To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: Re: Fair comparison C vs HLASM Because they don’t have any special knowledge of strings, only untyped data. And the lengths of the data they operate on is fixed and defined at compile time, not at run time. How about taking as a definition of a string any text that SuperC will search for? Or a text string in ISP? Obviously, what a string is and how it is defined varies from language to language. But usually they are not defined as binary data. Unicode excepted. Just by the way, a NULL as a string terminator seems to make sense. MVST (Move String), CLST (Compare String), SRST (Search String) are all instructs and all work with null terminated strings. Translate Extended is needed to work with Unicode without loosing one’s mind… - Paul > On Feb 8, 2018, at 2:14 PM, Seymour J Metz <sme...@gmu.edu> wrote: > > WTF? How are CLC, MVC, TR and TRT not string instructions? Or do you only > consider it to be a string if it conforms to the abominable C use of 0 as a > string delimiter? > > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__mason.gmu.edu_-7Es > metz3&d=DwIFaQ&c=UrUhmHsiTVT5qkaA4d_oSzcamb9hmamiCDMzBAEwC7E&r=RI5WP1B > N1KW_B4HrO2twbFFOhk97OdY6xsy0TwKReZE&m=3iRL-2thHu8_n1iTzmP0Cez2237D1Qy > HUBAC3uDHYGQ&s=W9ZQBeJXKBySzvdYR8sPm3s-4CpxJwskuRzTTgn9dtA&e= > > ________________________________________ > From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List <ASSEMBLER-LIST@listserv.uga.edu> > on behalf of Paul Raulerson <paul.rauler...@me.com> > Sent: Monday, February 5, 2018 10:53 PM > To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@listserv.uga.edu > Subject: Re: Fair comparison C vs HLASM > >> On Feb 5, 2018, at 7:29 PM, Robin Vowels <robi...@dodo.com.au> wrote: >> >> From: "Bernd Oppolzer" <bernd.oppol...@t-online.de> >> Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2018 1:23 AM >> >> >>> Am 05.02.2018 um 14:42 schrieb Gord Tomlin: >>> And, BTW, the historic facts are simply wrong: >>> IBM had a C compiler for MVS (and VM, I believe) long before there >>> were string instructions on z/Arch. >> >> MVC, CLC, MVCL, CLCL, MVO, MVN, ED, EDMK, TR, TRT are all string >> instructions. Most of these were available in 1965 with the S/360. >> Long before C. > > Oh my - but no. These are >character< operators, not string operators. > Much more akin to C’s memcpy() than anything else. (Yes, memcpy() was > built, in part, to emulate them.) > > CLST, CUSE, MVST, SRTST, and the later generations of these and other > instructions work on strings. Albeit, I think the definition of “string” in > this case is a little dodgy. > > I must say, it is a lot of fun to read some of these postings. I don’t > necessarily agree with a lot of them, but they are fun to read. > > z/OS as the epitome of a portable OS? HLASM more portable that C? > Does anyone really buy into that? I assumed it was a just leg pulling… > :) > > -Paul
