No problem, I've gotten names wrong myself, although I try not to.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List on behalf
of Dan Greiner
Sent: Friday, November 8, 2019 12:37 PM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV
I wrote nothing uncivil, and I certainly saw nothing uncivil in DGs message.
please cease forthwith referring to imaginary spats between lis members, which
some might regard as uncivil to both sides of the imaginary spat.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
__
DATA in OS/VS1 and SVS provided fragmentation relief even though there was only
a single address space. Your program could do a getmain for a large array and
never tie up page frames beyond the part that it actually used. Think sparse
arrays.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~s
Old habits die hard... I still just useLA 1,256although now I
might just code it asLA 1,256(,0)
:)
Notice in the example where there was a USING 0,9 that the assembler
ends up choosing the highest numbered register (9 versus 0 in this case)
when more than one USING is in effec
>> Should it produce a warming about ambiguous resolution?
yea- warming like: if you continue doing that, someone will give you a
bad carma (and hence you end up in a warm place)
;-)
--
Martin
On 2019-11-09, at 06:32:45, Peter Relson wrote:
>
>
> USING 0,9
>
> Got me. Obviously you're right that with that in effect the two LA forms
> produce different results.
>
Should it produce a warming about ambiguous resolution?
(I know that can be suppressed.)
-- gil
USING 0,9
Got me. Obviously you're right that with that in effect the two LA forms
produce different results.
Peter Relson
z/OS Core Technology Design
UNSUBSCRIBE
