On 2/11/2013 7:59 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Feb 11, 2013, at 08:37, Bill Fairchild wrote:
In order to make a simple trick like this easy to maintain by someone else in
the future, or even myself (since my intricately detailed memory is rather
short-lived), I would want to write so much
On 2/7/2013 5:24 PM, retired mainframer wrote:
I didn't think water cooled machines were still supported.
zEC12 can be water cooled for those that wish to save energy in their data
center.
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
On 1/22/2013 7:06 AM, Bodoh John Robert wrote:
We use the IBM debugger program to unit test assembler programs. We also use
the structured programming macros. When viewing the source code in the
debugger, all of the internal macros used by the structured macros also are
displayed. This
I thought some of you on this list might be interested...
WARNING: you cannot AMASPZAP a module compiled with SECTALGN(16). Only lower and
higher SECTALGN values are supported. This has caused us some grief in the
field. The ability to ZAP a module to provide temporary relief for a customer
On 1/16/2013 2:26 PM, Ward, Mike S wrote:
Can anyone please tell me where the description on how to use SVC's in z/OS is.
I remember back when there was a book devoted to MVS svc's and the parameters
required to call them. I can't seem to find one for z/OS.
MGCR/MGCRE is described in
On 12/20/2012 12:36 PM, esst...@juno.com wrote:
I have a program that loads CSRSI, It obtains Storage for the response area,
and invokes CSRSI via a Call
I wanted to replace the STORAGE MACRO with IAVR64
So I believe the program could be re-wriiten as follows:
*
LOAD EP=CSRSI
On 11/7/2012 7:21 AM, McKown, John wrote:
So, other than being non main stream and even obsessively weird, is there
any *technical* reason to maintain sequence numbers?
We got rid of sequence numbers in the majority of our HLASM source code long
ago. Only source code that is distributed to
On 11/6/2012 7:01 AM, Chuck Arney wrote:
I'm sure there are a number of tool providers that would like to take
advantage of smaller formats of ADATA. Each provider could roll their own,
but a standard published format would of course be more desirable for the
good of both provider and user.
On 11/5/2012 7:48 AM, David Cole wrote:
Does anyone know if the internal format of ASMLANGX files has been published?
Some of our ADATA libraries are larger than an entire 3390 mod3! XDC use of the
more compact ASMLANGX format would be most welcome...
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software
On 11/2/2012 7:40 AM, Bill Fairchild wrote:
Rather than belabor this issue any further, if you could post a link to some
explanation of the mathematical proof why clustering occurs around prime
factors of a composite modulo, I would love to read it and try to understand
what is going on.
On 10/28/2012 9:46 PM, Edward Jaffe wrote:
On 10/27/2012 10:01 AM, Johnny Luo wrote:
#include metal.h
#include string.h
void main()
{
_asm( here we are );
}
Shouldn't it be __asm instead of _asm?
A test conducted under z/OS 1.13 shows that _asm is an external function whereas
On 10/27/2012 10:01 AM, Johnny Luo wrote:
#include metal.h
#include string.h
void main()
{
_asm( here we are );
}
Shouldn't it be __asm instead of _asm?
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
310-338-0400 x318
On 9/22/2012 12:55 PM, Binyamin Dissen wrote:
On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 08:20:38 -0700 Edward Jaffe edja...@phoenixsoftware.com
wrote:
:There are existing search/update models in which the runner performs its
:search using only block-concurrent instructions (such as L) without
:serialization
On 9/21/2012 5:01 AM, Peter Relson wrote:
Of course Binyamin is right. Since the runner can get interrupted, then
the runner needs to run within a transaction too. (Getting interrupted
includes the z/OS LPAR getting interrupted by LPAR processing, which
covers even the disabled PSW case)
There
On 9/18/2012 2:09 PM, John Gilmore wrote:
Tony H:
I have already marked the typos I h ave found in SA22-7871-07. I plan
to send them to John Ehrman, who will see to their annihilation; and I
urge you to send yours to him too.
Better yet, send them to Dan Greiner.
Ed Jaffe
On 8/29/2012 6:33 AM, John Gilmore wrote:
Second, and more important, while Mr Dissen's notion that stereotyped,
'easy to understand' code sequences are to be prized in the real
world is his to cherish, I find it unattractive. Such sequences,
often copied unreflectively from elsewhere, are too
On 8/29/2012 11:07 AM, John Ehrman wrote:
But be careful: I've seen many examples of poor coding practices that --
simply because they were familar -- were propagated from one program to
another, to the detriment of all.
When I worked for a large bank in the 1980s, and saw how new JCL was
On 8/28/2012 5:27 AM, McKown, John wrote:
Value to be tested is in a register, not storage. On the newer machines, the
TMLL instruction can do this. But I run on a z9BC.
TMLL has been supported since 9672-G3 as TML.
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
831 Parkview Drive
On 8/28/2012 5:45 AM, David Bond wrote:
TMLL was included with the first set of Relative and Immediate instructions
way back on the 9672-G2. If you are willing to use AHI and BRC, then there
is not reason not to use TMLL.
I didn't see your response before I wrote mine. I said 'G3' but I'm
On 8/23/2012 3:40 PM, John Gilmore wrote:
PC is now an overloaded term, one that needs to be used carefully.
I'll say! I only read this thread because I thought it was talking about some
anomalous entry into a PC routine!
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
831 Parkview
The SHARE MVS Program has created a survey to help determine which topics to
include in upcoming conferences. The survey contains a list of z/OS enhancements
that we think should be implemented in most installations. Many of these aren't
implemented and we'd like your input to understand why. Our
On 7/1/2012 7:03 PM, Alex Kodat wrote:
As far as requiring smarts to see out eligible GETMAINs, my point was that it
shouldn't require any. Heck, even I was able to change all our storage
allocations
years ago to use 64-bit backing and haven't ever had a problem resulting from
that. I can
On 6/30/2012 9:32 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
Does the z hardware support 64-bit I/O?
Of course! CCW-based channel programs support 64-bit IDAWs (and MIDAWs). zHPF
channel programs, with or without TIDAWs, are natively 64-bit.
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
831 Parkview
On 6/28/2012 7:02 AM, Jay Toran wrote:
If the module is above the line, my code that the macro calls doesn't run.
I want to give the programmer a warning if that could happen by letting them
know at assemble time.
If it isn't possible, any ideas?
When presented with a similar challenge many
On 6/28/2012 2:12 PM, Binyamin Dissen wrote:
In what way?
RMODE ANY/31 does NOT guarantee that the module will be loaded above the line.
It is a preference.
Lol! If your address space is so 31-bit storage constrained that your RMODE(31)
program must be loaded into 24-bit memory, the
On 6/30/2012 7:57 AM, Edward Jaffe wrote:
For example, if a z/OS system is now capable of running 1000 more address spaces
than it could twenty years ago, that means 384,000 additional bytes of fixed,
common storage below 16MB is required just to hold the ASCBs (address space
control blocks
On 6/21/2012 7:36 AM, Sharuff Morsa3 wrote:
John took the initiative for creating High Level Assembler as a follow up
product to the older Assembler F and Assembler H; and he is widely
regarded as the father of HLASM.
[snip]
Many thanks to John and the developers in Perth (many of them
n 6/17/2012 8:18 AM, Hardee, Chuck wrote:
Hello Listers!
I am in the process of writing a macro and would like to control whether or not
some MNOTEs are generated.
What I am looking for is whether or not I can check the current status of GEN
versus NOGEN.
If the macro is assembled and PRINT
On 6/17/2012 9:13 AM, Martin Truebner wrote:
Ed,
can I link to yours from mine?
http://pi-sysprog.de/free/makerel.html
or (in another language)
http://pi-sysprog.de/free/makereld.html
on the very end
Of course! 8-)
Your bilingual perspective (I mean VSE/MVS, not English/German ;-) ) is
On 6/2/2012 5:38 PM, Tony Thigpen wrote:
but there is none to be made for doing so in
writing even a new single RSECT.
How about this reason.
We have several customers running our software that are on pre-MP3000
machines that don't even support relative instructions. They still pay
us for
On 6/5/2012 2:19 PM, Tom Marchant wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jun 2012 15:59:36 -0400, Scott Ford wrote:
where can you find a good sample of baseless assembler code ?
Look for Ed Jaffe's SHARE presentation Jumpify your code.
The original jumpify your code presentation was from 2007. When I updated it
On 6/14/2012 9:52 AM, McKown, John wrote:
If that is the definition:
label:
is functionally identical to:
label DS 0H
It would be __simple__ to implement for users of FLOWASM. Just modify the
source input routine to change the statement to remove the tailing : and insert
DS 0H.
Change
On 6/4/2012 12:48 PM, Binyamin Dissen wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jun 2012 14:20:09 -0500 McKown, John
john.mck...@healthmarkets.com wrote:
:No such thing as a negative displacement. A displacement is more like an
unsigned immediate operand. From 0..4095 (0x000 to 0xFFF for a 12 bit
displacement) or
On 6/13/2012 11:32 AM, Rob van der Heij wrote:
What's this talk about labels in assembler programs? Don't we all do
structured assembler now? ;-)
Of course! But, subroutines still need labels.
***
* Subroutine to Accumulate FOOs
On 6/5/2012 4:51 AM, McKown, John wrote:
My rule for most instructions is place any required label on a separate DS 0H
as the preceding statement.
I use DC 0H rather than DS 0H, but that is a minor difference. Naturally, the
label is always on its own line. Otherwise the instruction would not
On 5/23/2012 11:43 AM, Ray Mullins wrote:
Try using the HLASMTK SPM SELECT on a CLC where a variable-length literal is
the first operand. A CLC:2 or CLC2 macro or whatever would use the length of
the second operand would simplify a lot of code that I have inherited.
Excellent use case, Ray. We
On 5/22/2012 6:56 AM, Art Celestini wrote:
Personally, I have not encountered many circumstances where I needed to MVC
using
the length of the source.
I find that surprising.
I just scanned the assembler source code for one of our more popular products
and found 27,930 MVCs and 927 MVC2s.
On 5/22/2012 1:56 PM, Mike Shaw wrote:
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 2:29 PM, McKown, Johnjohn.mck...@healthmarkets.com
wrote:
...snip...IMO. I.e. a BASH UNIX prompt beats the crap out of line mode
TSOsnip...
Jeepers John, I gotta disagree with you on that one. How is '#' as a prompt
any better
On 4/25/2012 6:53 AM, McKown, John wrote:
I've tried finding about this using the -08 version of the Principles of
Operation. I got a few hits, but nothing which described what it actually
__does__. I can guess from the phrase, but I'd like something documented.
The description for z/OS
On 4/25/2012 8:31 AM, Mike Shaw wrote:
One could always try a SLIP SET,... command with ACTION=IGNORE to see if
the syntax one has a hunch about is correct.
And, if you try it on a z10 or earlier processor you will get:
IEE745I THE ZAD FACILITY IS NOT AVAILABLE
Looking up that message
On 4/11/2012 2:27 AM, Martin Packer wrote:
Trashing the I Cache is still very much a concern.
However, in the case posed to the group (branching around a constant to be
loaded into a register), the data is not being modified.
Though not ideal, it's perfectly OK to have instructions and
On 3/5/2012 3:18 PM, Kevin Lynch wrote:
A Common Area Dataspace is automatically shared between all existing and future
Address Spaces, whereas 64 bit shared storage is not automatically addressable
by all Address Spaces.
For that requirement one can acquire 64-bit common storage instead.
On 3/4/2012 4:34 PM, esst...@juno.com wrote:
Ed Jaffe wrote
What we do is invoke the binder (via the IEWBIND macro) to read in the RLDs for
the load module. Then we can relocate the module anywhere we want, including to
a data space.
I have been using offsets in the past and would like to
On 3/2/2012 1:29 AM, David Cole wrote:
If the PFLIH hook is (as it has been described earlier in these
threads) a mechanism by which a non-authorized process can become
authorized, then its very existence is a substantive offense in and
of itself. It is not just a template, it doesn't just show
On 3/2/2012 9:09 AM, David Cole wrote:
Certainly, the hearsay could be wrong. And I do hope that it is wrong.
But it is a better course to assume that the charge is right and
raise awareness to the point where it will be investigated and PROVEN
to be right or wrong...
... than it is to assume
On 3/1/2012 6:52 AM, David Cole wrote:
This is not just despicable, under today's law, it is actually criminal! Any
vendor who does this could be (and should be) jailed in criminal courts and
sued out of existence in civil courts.
I do not know who is doing this, but I believe utmost pressure
On 3/1/2012 9:23 AM, Binyamin Dissen wrote:
I would suggest by the fact that they do it in a tricky way and not in a
forthright way that there is an exposure. Otherwise why not simply use a PC?
There is no need to do this (at least since DAS) in the FLIH.
I suspect the code was written long
On 2/27/2012 1:44 PM, Gary DiPillo wrote:
Well, Ed, you must have already done that, since I just found it in CBT724.
The FILE724.XMI has a 12/26/2011 date, and the files in the .XMI have dates
from 2005.
Forgot about that. I think Sam Golob did that for me...
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix
On 2/24/2012 9:51 AM, Mike Shaw wrote:
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 8:43 AM, John Gilmorejohnwgilmore0...@gmail.comwrote:
snip
I believe, however, that this name should be made public. This
information should not be confined to the priesthood
John,
The name of the offending ISV can be inferred
On 2/22/2012 6:47 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
Why is a RDJFCB required at all? I'm primarily not an assembler
programmer, but I've coded a few OPENs successfully, but never
a RDJFCB. I would suggest that if RDJFCB fails, let FLOWASM,
not assembler, proceed with its OPEN and I/O processing.
If
On 2/22/2012 7:01 AM, McKown, John wrote:
... but still send each record read by the assembler to the PROCESS
subfunction in order to do its magic. It works wonderfully.
Yay! Another happy customer! :-)
I've also changed the PROCESS subfunction to translate all x'05' (EBCDIC tabs)
to x'40'
On 2/21/2012 8:52 AM, McKown, John wrote:
I keep my HLASM source in z/OS UNIX files. Just because I want to.. This works well for me. The only problem that I've run into is
when I edit with vi (yes, I get what I deserve). ISPF edit knows that if I replace ABCD with EF,
it should only move the
On 1/19/2012 3:38 PM, Micheal Butz wrote:
Is there anyway to print character variables to debug macros LCLC GBLC or
for that matter arithmetic values GBLA LBLA binary values LBLB GBLB
MHELP
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
On 1/17/2012 6:40 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
I forget; is the target of EX treated as a data access or as an instruction
access for cacne management?
The 256-byte cache line containing the target instruction is loaded into
I-cache.
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
831
On 1/17/2012 8:06 AM, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
Others have said here that performance is a strong reason
for _not_ coding in assembler:
o Compiler developers have done the research on instruction
timings and know better than most end users what sequences
fit the pipelines optimally.
On 1/12/2012 7:32 AM, McKown, John wrote:
I ask about the CPU cost of an EX because that same program that I'm working on uses the
EX a fair amount to move variable length strings into a blank-initialized
area for reporting purposes. Instead of EX of an MVC, I could use MVCL or MVCLE. But many
On 1/11/2012 6:27 AM, McKown, John wrote:
Is the ROI for the conversion less than a single year? If not, forget it. That's all that is
keeping the z alive here. The break even on the up front cost to convert from z/OS to
Windows is currently estimated to be 2 to 3 years. That is far too long
On 1/11/2012 6:42 AM, McKown, John wrote:
What is the big deal? Well, I remember how everybody complains when IBM steps on their
macro name. But, if you name your internal macro with a _ in it, which is valid in an HLASM symbol,
but which cannot be easily used in a PDS member name, the
On 1/9/2012 10:38 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
I have an Immodest Proposal. (I'll not leave that platform to John M.,
exclusively.) Define the future extension of the TOD clock as a signed binary
112-bit (111+sign) value. Rationale: given that some contracts and treaties
entered in the 19th century
On 1/10/2012 4:04 PM, John P. Baker wrote:
LAEY instruction if the operand is specified as '(SL,{symbol |
expression})' and SYSSTATE ASCENV=ASC is in effect ;
LAEY. I wish! We can't use the general-instructions-extension facility. :-(
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International,
On 12/30/2011 6:43 AM, John Gilmore wrote:
Case control is a more complicated issue. In situations like the one
EJ describes I have found the two options that the HLASM already
supports, viz.,
o CASE | NOCASE, and
o MACROCASE|NOMACROCASE
entirely adequate; but this is because I work in a
On 12/30/2011 9:47 AM, John Gilmore wrote:
NOCOMPAT(NOCASE,NOMACROCASE)
[snip]
With NOCOMPAT(NOCASE) in effect the HLASM thus distinguishes among
MyLabel, MYLABEL, etc. I does not treat them as synonyms.
This does not appear to be true in the assembler I'm using (HLASM 6.0). Please
post an
On 12/23/2011 8:42 AM, Steve Comstock wrote:
Sure, camel case. And the nice thing is the Assembler
will recognize variable names if you happen to forget
and not capitalize the first letter, since it is
case-insensitive.
I also like camel case. It looks much better than using underscores to
On 12/10/2011 4:08 AM, Bernd Oppolzer wrote:
To solve this problem, I ended up with a GET routine for every QSAM dataset,
where the EODAD address is part of the routine. The GET routine looked like
this (from memory, I don't have the sources at hand):
GET1 PSTART (R10,R14)start macro
On 12/10/2011 6:22 AM, Steve Comstock wrote:
Hmmm. Are you advocating use of semiprivileged instructions
in application code then? Or only some of them? Which ones
are 'safe' or 'OK' to use in standard application programs?
Where does one draw the line?
Once your minimum supported operating
On 12/10/2011 11:41 AM, Steve Comstock wrote:
Wow! I didn't know I wielded such power. :-)
You da Man! :-D
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
310-338-0400 x318
edja...@phoenixsoftware.com
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/
On 12/9/2011 7:53 AM, Steve Comstock wrote:
I disagree. Why test a flag after every GET? QSAM essentially
does that for you and branches you to EODAD automatically; if
you find yourself in your EODAD routine you know you're ready
for the next phase of your processing, which might be just
On 12/9/2011 9:07 AM, Steve Comstock wrote:
Right, so I would argue that the GET approach is more 'traditional'
than the 'traditional approach' you describe: it's been around longer.
I should have said 'typical'. The flaws introduced by older 1960s-era designs
have been corrected in modern
On 12/9/2011 11:33 AM, Steve Comstock wrote:
For application programming (granted: there are precious few
applications written in Assembler these days, except by
software product developers), I actually disdain using the
linkage stack, for these reasons:
Actually, I wasn't talking about the
On 12/8/2011 8:14 AM, Martin Truebner wrote:
Much better solution is what (ITIR) Ed J. uses ... a MACRO called MVCSL (or
so) which means MVC in sender length.
I'm surprised you remember this! It was something I accidentally left in a
sample code fragment in a SHARE presentation years ago.
We
On 12/8/2011 9:57 AM, Steve Comstock wrote:
BAKR R14,0 Save caller's ARs and GPRs
Why do you care about the caller's ARs? First, you are
a main program so the caller is z/OS. Overkill. Why not
use standard save area chaining?
BAKR R14,0 is a standard entry linkage
On 10/21/2011 5:40 AM, Tom Marchant wrote:
On Thu, 20 Oct 2011 14:03:55 -0700, Edward Jaffe wrote:
It's inconvenient to have to keep SYSSTATE manually synchronized.
You could issue SYSSTATE first and then code a macro that tests
SYSSTATE and uses it to specify the corresponding AMODE.
Nice
On 10/20/2011 12:23 PM, John Ehrman wrote:
There is no system variable symbol that captures this information.
Too bad. It would be useful to be able to code SYSSTATE operands based upon the
value of a variable like SYSAMODE--the AMODE of the CSECT at an entry point.
The AMODE value in the
On 8/9/2011 12:04 PM, Baraniecki, Ray wrote:
I am looking for the IBM macro IECTDECB. Can anyone assist?
In z/OS a DECB is mapped by SYS1.MODGEN(IHADECB). Are you doing this on another
operating system?
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo,
On 8/9/2011 12:55 PM, Gerhard Postpischil wrote:
On 8/9/2011 3:04 PM, Baraniecki, Ray wrote:
I am looking for the IBM macro IECTDECB. Can anyone assist?
It's in (my) SYS1.MACLIB
For which release?
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA
On 8/9/2011 3:05 PM, Dougie Lawson wrote:
If you've got IMS. There's a copy of that old BTAM macro in
IMS.SDFSMAC(DFSBDECB) [That's in my IMS 11 macro library.]
Got it! 8-)
IECTDECB DSECT
***
** DFSBDECB - IMS/BTAM
On 7/26/2011 5:30 PM, John McKown wrote:
Smarter phising, I'd guess. They now monitor the lists and determine
whose id to spoof. Then post with that id in order to make people think
it is legit.
Keep that in mind the next time you get an email from me saying you can cure
your ED woes. Hey, I
On 6/21/2011 5:33 AM, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
Thanks Abe, but I already have all of the editions from zero through eight. What I am
requesting is information -- Which z/Arch machine does each of the editions correspond
to? For instance, where in the edition spectrum does the z109 fall?
On 6/5/2011 10:14 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Jun 5, 2011, at 10:12, Edward Jaffe wrote:
We had discussed writing a macro to consume 'friendly' DCs and emit the
'unfriendly' DC(s), so I missed the fact that you were running your test in open
code.
Thanks.
You mean the behavior is different
On 6/4/2011 12:58 PM, John Ehrman wrote:
Paul Gilmartin was irritated:
o It's particularly irritating that PRINT OFF was printed 40
times in the listing. G. When I say PRINT OFF, I mean
don't print anything until I POP PRINT.
Try PRINT OFF,NOPRINT to suppress it. There are NOPRINT
On 6/3/2011 2:08 PM, Robert A. Rosenberg wrote:
Here is a simple solution. Create a $DC macro to use in lieu of the
DC. That will allow you to format your DC as you want (ie: Macro
continuation format). Inside the macro you can generate each parm as
a separate DC (to avoid the need to emit end
On 6/1/2011 7:39 AM, Gerhard Postpischil wrote:
Some years ago I was asked to do maintenance on an ISV's
package. While I found dozens of errors, one 0Cx was due to a
LOGON and a non-VTAM exit triggering at the same time, using the
same save area. What is more interesting, that program had been
On 5/20/2011 4:24 PM, Shane G wrote:
No problem Peter, finally convinced me to go lurk over there - seems the
threads are likely to be more riveting than a few here of late.
IBM-MAIN is OK as long as your 'kill' list contains the right email addresses.
:-)
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software
On 5/17/2011 5:48 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
... Is there a single system call which
retrieves both date and time in an atomic fashion, guaranteeing
consistency?
TIME
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
310-338-0400 x318
On 4/16/2011 6:28 PM, Binyamin Dissen wrote:
... the basic advantage of the
PLO is that it avoids the need for locks with non-contiguous serialized areas
if the retry rate is low.
Also, unlike CD[S], PLO allows for up to 'n' (model dependent) locked operations
to be performed simultaneously by
On 4/15/2011 3:59 PM, Hall, Keven wrote:
... I thought the hardware optimized for cases
where source and target resolved to the same storage location, such that
it was a single access, block concurrent operation.
This could very well be true on some, most or even all models. But, since POO
On 4/12/2011 10:15 AM, Tony Harminc wrote:
On 12 April 2011 12:50, Tom Marchantm42tom-ibmm...@yahoo.com wrote:
When you issue a PR, the system automatically deactivates all
ESTAE-type recovery routines that were previously activated under
that current linkage stack entry.
How does the system
On 4/11/2011 5:10 PM, John McKown wrote:
Can BAKR be used in SRB?
Of course!
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
310-338-0400 x318
edja...@phoenixsoftware.com
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/
On 4/9/2011 7:55 AM, Kirk Wolf wrote:
... and my point is that in the real world there is not only
more reusable library code in C but that it is easier to reuse,
being a HLL.
C is considered an HLL?
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA
On 4/9/2011 11:50 AM, Bernd Oppolzer wrote:
Many algorithms, for example quicksort or walking thru binary trees
or inserting into balanced trees like AVL trees etc., need to be written
as recursive functions or procedures. If you want to do this in ASSEMBLER,
you have to do all the housekeeping
On 4/7/2011 9:42 AM, Angel Luis DomÃnguez wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 14:32:56 +0300, Binyamin Dissen
bdis...@dissensoftware.com wrote:
LE will LOAD the module on the first call and then BALR the later calls.
Change your ASM module to LOAD it and BALR as well.
I did it and now the results are
On 3/28/2011 3:55 AM, Fred van der Windt wrote:
Is it possible to retrieve the serialnumber of the cpu the program is currently
running on without the use of any privileged instructions?
CSRSI or QVS.
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo,
On 3/8/2011 8:06 AM, John Walker wrote:
I imagine I was not clear enough in my previous post. What I meant to
emphasize was that macros are obscure, and not worth the effort. I did NOT
imply they were useless. I tried to imply that IBM uses them, and uses them
well.
The macros you see
John Ehrman, who was honored with a 'SHARE Distinguished Speaker Award' at SHARE
in Anaheim, honored _me_ with the gift of a Red, White Blue button that reads:
The right the people peaceably to ASSEMBLE shall not be abridged.
Amen! Thank you, John. And, congratulations on your award. It is
Oops. Typing too fast. Left out a word. The button actually reads:
The right of the people peaceably to ASSEMBLE shall not be abridged.
On 3/7/2011 4:16 PM, Edward Jaffe wrote:
John Ehrman, who was honored with a 'SHARE Distinguished Speaker Award' at SHARE
in Anaheim, honored _me_
On 2/19/2011 12:08 PM, Chris Craddock wrote:
My question is more fundamental. Why use the SRB at all? The PC service caller
is already dispatched on a perfectly good unit of work, has addressability to
both address spaces and, while running inside the PC, is in a sufficiently
God-like state to
On 2/12/2011 3:05 PM, Edward Jaffe wrote:
On 2/12/2011 2:37 PM, esst...@juno.com wrote:
Now Address Space A has an SRB Routing executing in its address space in
Supervisor State.
Has anyone seen the above Architecture/Technique used ?
Is this a commonly used technique ?
I would think it's
On 2/13/2011 9:34 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
IANAL, but vendor's own product might be a slippery concept. Would
this preclude the vendor's using code licensed from a subcontractor?
If not, might the vendor engage the actual customer as a subcontractor
who licenses the payload code to the vendor,
On 2/4/2011 7:08 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
Rexx SIGNAL sucks. One one hand, it trashes the DO...END structure; OTOH
it leaves the subroutine return stack hanging (a naive colleague once
authored a Rexx program that used SIGNAL to get out of Dodge. He tested
it, apparently successfully. It
On 2/3/2011 10:41 AM, Johanson, Adam wrote:
Then, I told myself that the whole point of the exercise was to make the code
more readable, so a branch to a return-to-caller label every now and then didn't really
defeat the purpose and actually _did_ help things. IMHO, rather than seeing
1 - 100 of 134 matches
Mail list logo
