Using an operand with the wrong length is a basic error, not limited to OPEN or
even to macros. Further, your code would fail even if you corrected HERE24O to
OPEN (DCB1,INPUT,*,),MF=L; R5 doesn't contain a DCB address.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
___
Hi Guys,
Thanks for the responses, here's mine...
To Charles...
You made my point exactly, as you didn't at first realise what the code was
doing, but you did 10 minutes later :-)
Mark Nelson is not your guy for this, unless you think there is an
integrity issue
I believe there is, it certai
Good guess, but no. The code overlays an instruction with R5, which contains a
modified copy of the instruction. As a result the length of the move will be
256 instead of 8. It does not in any way subvert code. The code itself is bad,
but that's a separate issue. It's not rocket science.
Shoot
No integrity violation at all.
Simply bad coding.
While one could suggest a bi-address mode OPEN, I doubt that anyone other than
you would be interested.
Finally, IBM-MAIN would be much more appropriate.
On Fri, 11 Jun 2021 21:36:20 +0100 MELVYN MALTZ
<072265160664-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ug
