Sorry, I didn't notice the ZAP initially. If you want to pursue it, you could try playing with the "S" (sign indicator) in the pictures. (Try removing it from one or the other, or both, operands.) I believe the ZAP is added by the compiler to ensure sign consistency. But, obviously, we don't want it here.
--Art At 09:11 AM 11/23/2005, Chase, John wrote: >[...snip] >It just occurred to me that the ZAP instruction generated for the COBOL >MOVE statement could lead to S0C7s, so I checked the PoPs manual: > >"Only the second operand is checked for valid sign and digit codes." > >What's significant here is that the second operand IS checked. > >Suppose the "second operand" (WS-HEX-INPUT-ARG) is initially the SNA >sense code x'087D0001'. The fact that it's redefined as a COBOL COMP-3 >field does not make it so. I believe the ZAP in this instance would >"choke" on the 'D' in the middle of the "number". > >What's needed here is a means to generate the UNPK instruction without >the ZAP, and I can't think of any.... ================================================== Art Celestini Celestini Development Services Phone: 201-670-1674 Wyckoff, NJ ============= http://celestini.com ============= Mail sent to the "From" address used in this post will be rejected by our server. Please send off- list email to: ibmmain<at-sign>celestini<dot>com. ================================================== ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
