Re: Advanced Assembler Language etc.
John, Did you ever finish the text book? Tony Thigpen John R. Ehrman (408-463-3543 T/543-) wrote on 07/09/2009 02:00 PM: I'm writing an Assembler Language textbook, and hope to finish by the end of this year. John Ehrman (-- Referenced Note Follows ) Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2009 09:14:26 -0400 From: John Carini jcar...@ups.com What book would you recomend for someone who has some limited Assembler coding experience, but still is learning to code the language?
Re: 8 character mnemonics
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 4:28 AM, Sharuff Morsa3 sharuff_mo...@uk.ibm.com wrote: Ain't progress wonderful? Anyone know how to stop it ? (progress that is) I would not rule out 8 character mnemonics nor 8 character HLASM assembler directives (not that I'm currently planning any). Because of the very large number of mnemonics and extended mnemonics which have been added, there are some ISPF SuperC commands to assist users in searching their source, copybook and macro libraries to see if they may be affected (http://www.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21694301). The new instructions have highlighted a problem for which we have to strike a balance. Several of the new instructions have the same mnemonics but differing instruction formats. Who can successfully execute ESA/390 vector instructions ? But some users will have these mnemonics are coded in their applications (anyone want to own up having some?). Should we always (100%) maintain the ability for users programs to assemble programs cleanly even though they would not execute successfully? How much can a product change (or evolve) without users having to make some or consider those changes ? IBM z Systems have a very long history of minimising the affect of changes on users - but products and their usage change over time. How customers use our products changes over time. Is that progress ? Sharuff Sharuff Morsa IBM Hursley Labs One thing that I can think of which _might_ be of some help would be to have either another program, or a PARM= value for HLASM for a source validation. That is, it would act like HLASM, but would flag all opcodes which are HLASM machine opcodes and which _also_ exist as members in the SYSLIB concatenation. I don't know if HLASM does this already, but it would be nice if all machine instructions supported by HLASM, but _excluded_ by using the OPTABLE/MACHINE compile parameter, were only searched for as macros. Lastly, it might be nice to have a program which can pseudo-compile a source program and not only flag machine instruction opcodes which exist as members in the SYSLIB concatenation, but would also create an IEBUPDTE control deck which puts a :MAC on the end of the opcode. The user could then edit this and use it to more easily update their source. Just some ideas. -- While a transcendent vocabulary is laudable, one must be eternally careful so that the calculated objective of communication does not become ensconced in obscurity. In other words, eschew obfuscation. 111,111,111 x 111,111,111 = 12,345,678,987,654,321 Maranatha! John McKown
Re: 8 character mnemonics
But are new mnemonics vetted against all member names in all maclibs of all IBM products? (Do significant ISVs count?) ISVs (and IBM products) are informed ahead of the general public of the new mnemonics; it is conceivable that a change/accommodation would be made if there were a good business need. Likely? I don't know. Peter Relson z/OS Core Technology Design
Re: 8 character mnemonics
Ain't progress wonderful? Anyone know how to stop it ? (progress that is) I would not rule out 8 character mnemonics nor 8 character HLASM assembler directives (not that I'm currently planning any). Because of the very large number of mnemonics and extended mnemonics which have been added, there are some ISPF SuperC commands to assist users in searching their source, copybook and macro libraries to see if they may be affected (http://www.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21694301). The new instructions have highlighted a problem for which we have to strike a balance. Several of the new instructions have the same mnemonics but differing instruction formats. Who can successfully execute ESA/390 vector instructions ? But some users will have these mnemonics are coded in their applications (anyone want to own up having some?). Should we always (100%) maintain the ability for users programs to assemble programs cleanly even though they would not execute successfully? How much can a product change (or evolve) without users having to make some or consider those changes ? IBM z Systems have a very long history of minimising the affect of changes on users - but products and their usage change over time. How customers use our products changes over time. Is that progress ? Sharuff Sharuff Morsa IBM Hursley Labs Date:Wed, 21 Jan 2015 11:03:34 -0800 From:John Ehrman ehr...@us.ibm.com Subject: Re: 8 character mnemonics Paul Gilmartin asked... But are new mnemonics vetted against all member names in all maclibs of all IBM products? (Do significant ISVs count?) That was indeed done many moons ago, but the number of products with private macro libraries grew far beyond the capabilities of the vetters so it's not done any longer. John Ehrman -- Date:Wed, 21 Jan 2015 15:18:27 -0700 From:Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com Subject: Re: 8 character mnemonics On 2015-01-21 12:03, John Ehrman wrote: Paul Gilmartin asked... But are new mnemonics vetted against all member names in all maclibs of all IBM products? (Do significant ISVs count?) That was indeed done many moons ago, but the number of products with private macro libraries grew far beyond the capabilities of the vetters so it's not done any longer. Ain't progress wonderful? -- gil -- End of ASSEMBLER-LIST Digest - 20 Jan 2015 to 21 Jan 2015 (#2015-12) Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
Re: 8 character mnemonics
Having a quick scan of our SYS1.MACLIB - I've found only 2 clashes between the z/OS macros and the instructions mnemonics - CHI and DSG.
Re: 8 character mnemonics
I don't have z/OS, I actually code assembler using: VM, VSE, and Dignus (to upload as objects to VSE). Dignus lets me use long macro names natively. And, I use it for most things, but one of my jobs requires me to assemble code for VSE using VM's assembler, so that is why I came up with the remapping macros. Tony Thigpen Paul Gilmartin wrote on 01/22/2015 10:12 AM: On 2015-01-22, at 06:54, Tony Thigpen wrote: I have used longer-than-8 macros for many years. Works great. I have one source macro that I include at the top of the member that is just 8 characters long. Inside, it has many macro 'redefs' so that I can use a long macro name in the code, but it gets converted to a shorter 8 character macro before going out to the library to get the macro. A short example: MACRO NAMEPERFORM_ON ADDR,BAD_VALUE= NAMEPERFORMO ADDR,BAD_VALUE=BAD_VALUE MEND An excellent refutation of those who insist that 8 characters are all that anybody should ever need. or that 44 characters are all that anybody should ever need. Those limits impel users such as you to reinvent that wheel repeatedly, repeatedly. Of course, the z/OS UNIX filesystem has far more generous limits. If only HLASM would exploit them as XLC does ... BTW, it's regrettable that HLASM has no constructs such as POSIX shell has to designate the entire argument list (viz. $@). I could imagine the renamed macro call as something such as: NAMEPERFORMO (1-*) ... where (1-*) would mean the entire argument list. Likewise, an analogue of shift N to delete the first n arguments and shift the remaining ones left N positions could be very useful, often removing the requirement to code tedious loops. -- gil
Re: 8 character mnemonics
On 2015-01-22, at 06:54, Tony Thigpen wrote: I have used longer-than-8 macros for many years. Works great. I have one source macro that I include at the top of the member that is just 8 characters long. Inside, it has many macro 'redefs' so that I can use a long macro name in the code, but it gets converted to a shorter 8 character macro before going out to the library to get the macro. A short example: MACRO NAMEPERFORM_ON ADDR,BAD_VALUE= NAMEPERFORMO ADDR,BAD_VALUE=BAD_VALUE MEND An excellent refutation of those who insist that 8 characters are all that anybody should ever need. or that 44 characters are all that anybody should ever need. Those limits impel users such as you to reinvent that wheel repeatedly, repeatedly. Of course, the z/OS UNIX filesystem has far more generous limits. If only HLASM would exploit them as XLC does ... BTW, it's regrettable that HLASM has no constructs such as POSIX shell has to designate the entire argument list (viz. $@). I could imagine the renamed macro call as something such as: NAMEPERFORMO (1-*) ... where (1-*) would mean the entire argument list. Likewise, an analogue of shift N to delete the first n arguments and shift the remaining ones left N positions could be very useful, often removing the requirement to code tedious loops. -- gil
Re: 8 character mnemonics
John, I have various macros that use embedded macros. To avoid naming collisions I have always used more than 8 characters to name these macros. I can tell you: it has worked fine for me from day one. Kind regards, Abe Kornelis. == John Ehrman schreef op 21-1-2015 om 20:02: Dave Cole noted again... But it does make me wonder if they might eventually go to 9 or longer... I think HLASM has supported operation field entries longer than 8 characters for a long time, but resolution was possible only to source macros. (No, I haven't tried it.) John Ehrman
Re: Advanced Assembler Language etc.
Yes, but he said he hoped to get it done by the end of 2009. He's had 5 extra years. :-) :-) Tony Thigpen Gary Weinhold wrote on 01/22/2015 01:09 PM: He would get it done, if he didn't have to answer all these pesky emails! Gary On 2015-01-22 12:47, Rich Smrcina wrote: Indeed! On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Capps, Joey jca...@informatica.com wrote: I think there are probably a lot of us hoping to see this ! Joey -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of Tony Thigpen Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 8:14 AM To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: Re: Advanced Assembler Language etc. John, Did you ever finish the text book? Tony Thigpen John R. Ehrman (408-463-3543 T/543-) wrote on 07/09/2009 02:00 PM: I'm writing an Assembler Language textbook, and hope to finish by the end of this year. John Ehrman (-- Referenced Note Follows ) Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2009 09:14:26 -0400 From: John Carini jcar...@ups.com What book would you recomend for someone who has some limited Assembler coding experience, but still is learning to code the language?
Advanced Assembler Language etc.
Tony Thigpen, Joey Capps, Rich Smrcina, and others have asked: Did you ever finish the text book? Yes, it's done (or at least, I've stopped adding to it) (for now). I've gotten permission to make it available, and am working on a convenient distribution mechanism. I'm hoping you'll be able to download it in a couple of weeks; when it's set up I expect to post a note on this list and on IBM-MAIN with the details.
Re: Advanced Assembler Language etc.
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 1:01 PM, John Ehrman ehr...@us.ibm.com wrote: Tony Thigpen, Joey Capps, Rich Smrcina, and others have asked: Did you ever finish the text book? Yes, it's done (or at least, I've stopped adding to it) (for now). I've gotten permission to make it available, and am working on a convenient distribution mechanism. I'm hoping you'll be able to download it in a couple of weeks; when it's set up I expect to post a note on this list and on IBM-MAIN with the details. Cost? Format? For format, I prefer to read on my Nexus 10 table, so either Kindle or epub is my favorite. PDF is OK, but epub tends to be better for most textual material. It is not as nice if you have a lot of diagrams or pictures. -- While a transcendent vocabulary is laudable, one must be eternally careful so that the calculated objective of communication does not become ensconced in obscurity. In other words, eschew obfuscation. 111,111,111 x 111,111,111 = 12,345,678,987,654,321 Maranatha! John McKown
Re: 8 character mnemonics
The HLASMTK SPMs have been doing this for years. Macros like IF are OPSYNed to ASM_IF, and the source for ASM_IF is in the copy member. -- M. Ray Mullins Roseville, CA, USA http://www.catherdersoftware.com/ http://www.z390.org/ German is essentially a form of assembly language consisting entirely of far calls heavily accented with throaty guttural sounds. ---ilvi French is essentially German with messed-up pronunciation and spelling. --Robert B Wilson English is essentially French converted to 7-bit ASCII. ---Christophe Pierret [for Alain LaBonté] On 2015-01-22 05:54, Tony Thigpen wrote: I have used longer-than-8 macros for many years. Works great. I have one source macro that I include at the top of the member that is just 8 characters long. Inside, it has many macro 'redefs' so that I can use a long macro name in the code, but it gets converted to a shorter 8 character macro before going out to the library to get the macro. A short example: MACRO NAMEPERFORM_ON ADDR,BAD_VALUE= NAMEPERFORMO ADDR,BAD_VALUE=BAD_VALUE MEND Then, in my code, I use the longer PERFORM_ON. Some of my macro names are quite long, like: GET_FIRST_IN_CHAIN ADD_END_OFF_CHAIN FIND_IN_CHAIN Tony Thigpen John Ehrman wrote on 01/21/2015 02:02 PM: Dave Cole noted again... But it does make me wonder if they might eventually go to 9 or longer... I think HLASM has supported operation field entries longer than 8 characters for a long time, but resolution was possible only to source macros. (No, I haven't tried it.) John Ehrman -- M. Ray Mullins Roseville, CA, USA http://www.catherdersoftware.com/ http://www.z390.org/ German is essentially a form of assembly language consisting entirely of far calls heavily accented with throaty guttural sounds. ---ilvi French is essentially German with messed-up pronunciation and spelling. --Robert B Wilson English is essentially French converted to 7-bit ASCII. ---Christophe Pierret [for Alain LaBonté]
Re: Advanced Assembler Language etc.
He would get it done, if he didn't have to answer all these pesky emails! Gary On 2015-01-22 12:47, Rich Smrcina wrote: Indeed! On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Capps, Joey jca...@informatica.com wrote: I think there are probably a lot of us hoping to see this ! Joey -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of Tony Thigpen Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 8:14 AM To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: Re: Advanced Assembler Language etc. John, Did you ever finish the text book? Tony Thigpen John R. Ehrman (408-463-3543 T/543-) wrote on 07/09/2009 02:00 PM: I'm writing an Assembler Language textbook, and hope to finish by the end of this year. John Ehrman (-- Referenced Note Follows ) Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2009 09:14:26 -0400 From: John Carini jcar...@ups.com What book would you recomend for someone who has some limited Assembler coding experience, but still is learning to code the language?
Re: 8 character mnemonics
Lastly, it might be nice to have a program which can pseudo-compile a source program and not only flag machine instruction opcodes which exist as members in the SYSLIB concatenation, but would also create an IEBUPDTE control deck which puts a :MAC on the end of the opcode. The user could then edit this and use it to more easily update their source. Extracting all member names (and their library names) in the SYSLIB concatenation, should be trivial even in Rexx. The z13 mnemonics table is available. Now use ICETOOLS and find all corresponding names.ZA
Re: Advanced Assembler Language etc.
I think there are probably a lot of us hoping to see this ! Joey -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of Tony Thigpen Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 8:14 AM To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: Re: Advanced Assembler Language etc. John, Did you ever finish the text book? Tony Thigpen John R. Ehrman (408-463-3543 T/543-) wrote on 07/09/2009 02:00 PM: I'm writing an Assembler Language textbook, and hope to finish by the end of this year. John Ehrman (-- Referenced Note Follows ) Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2009 09:14:26 -0400 From: John Carini jcar...@ups.com What book would you recomend for someone who has some limited Assembler coding experience, but still is learning to code the language?
Re: Advanced Assembler Language etc.
Indeed! On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Capps, Joey jca...@informatica.com wrote: I think there are probably a lot of us hoping to see this ! Joey -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of Tony Thigpen Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 8:14 AM To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: Re: Advanced Assembler Language etc. John, Did you ever finish the text book? Tony Thigpen John R. Ehrman (408-463-3543 T/543-) wrote on 07/09/2009 02:00 PM: I'm writing an Assembler Language textbook, and hope to finish by the end of this year. John Ehrman (-- Referenced Note Follows ) Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2009 09:14:26 -0400 From: John Carini jcar...@ups.com What book would you recomend for someone who has some limited Assembler coding experience, but still is learning to code the language? -- Rich Smrcina Velocity Software, Inc.
