Greg,
here is my take (as innocent bystander)
there are (if not now then pretty soon) HLASM equates that include the
condition in the op-code mnemonic- instead of
LOC R1,=A(=CA'MT'),8
you could code
LOE R1,=A(=CA'MT') Do we have the initials of that special person?
or maybe the new mnemonic is LOCE, anyway- you get the hang of it
Martin
Am 13.01.26 um 12:29 schrieb [email protected]:
I was looking at the LOC and STOC instructions and thought:
You know, if instead of
LOC R1,D2(B2),M3
they had made it
LOC R1,M3,D2(B2)
then it would match the syntax of CLM, ICM and STCM.
Perhaps the designers of this syntax would say that the "old folks" got it
wrong when they put M3 between R1 and D2(B2).
Note that I am not talking about the instruction bit pattern layout - that's
all regulation perfect AFAIAC.
Back to the "new" syntax - do you think that they were considering instructions
where the mask is optional, such as
SSKE R1,R2[,M3]
where M3 is optional (and assumed to be zero if not specified)?
(By which I mean, it is easier for coders if the optional operand is at the end
of the operand list.)
Cheers,
Greg
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
