Then I use IILH unless the length is too large.

-- 
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל חַי
נֵ֣צַח יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל לֹ֥א יְשַׁקֵּ֖ר




________________________________________
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List <[email protected]> on behalf 
of David Clark <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2026 6:45 PM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [External Sender] Re: Loading the pad byte for MVCL


External Message: Use Caution


But what if the length is calculated (not from an equate or L' attribute)
and is already in the target register?

Sincerely,
Dave Clark


On Thu, Mar 5, 2026 at 5:43 PM Seymour J Metz <[email protected]> wrote:

> That what I use, but I typically have a nonzero length, so it's
>
>          LFI   Rx,X'40000000'+L'y
>
>
> --
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
> עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל חַי
> נֵ֣צַח יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל לֹ֥א יְשַׁקֵּ֖ר
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________________
> From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List <[email protected]> on
> behalf of Jonathan Scott <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2026 3:42 PM
> To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: Loading the pad byte for MVCL
>
>
> External Message: Use Caution
>
>
> It's not clear whether you're assuming 31-bit or 64-bit mode.  If it's
> only 31-bit, then IILF (also known as LFI if you have a recent maintenance
> level of HLASM) would probably be best as a hardware solution, and you can
> write the immediate value as follows if you like:
>
>  LFI R15,C' '*X'1000000'
>
> Jonathan Scott
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List <[email protected]> On
> Behalf Of Mark Hammack
> Sent: 05 March 2026 20:32
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Loading the pad byte for MVCL
>
> So, I was wondering if anyone had a "better" way.
>
> I've done:
>
> IC  R15,C' '
> SLL R15,24
>
> and
>
> LGFI R15,X'40000000'
>
> and
>
> LY   R15,PADCHAR
> ...
> PADCHAR DC C' ',X'000000'
>
> What I'd like is to do something like the LGFI (or LLILH) but using the
> more "self documenting" PADCHAR format.
>
> I'm probably just too picky.  I could probably write a SETPAD macro and
> use SLL, just haven't tried that yet.
>
>
> *Mark Hammack*
> [email protected]
>
>
>


Reply via email to