Back in he Assembler XF era I would code something like
LAR0,L'DEST
LAR1,DEST
XRR15,R15
ICM R15,8,=C' '
MVCL R0,R14
On current hardware there is an IILF (LFI) instruction, and I would like to use
it instead of the XR/ICM sequence. I con
Seymour,
You usage of the even/odd R0/R1 pair appears to be reversed (unless you
intended to zero some memory at whatever location L'DEST resolves to ... not to
worry, it happens to dyslexic programmers like me all the time).
I don't know of any means by which you can split the definition of a
Seymour,
How about this:
LLILH R15,X’4000’
Tom Harper
Phoenix Software International
Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 29, 2024, at 12:56 PM, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>
> Back in he Assembler XF era I would code something like
>
> LAR0,L'DEST
> LAR1,DEST
> XR
On 3/29/24 10:56:49, Seymour J Metz wrote:
Ba... I consider
LFI R15,X'4000'
to be ugly, and would like to be able to either use an immediate field combing
CL1 and XL3 pieces or to refer to an EQU defining that combination. Is there
any way to do that in HLASM?
Is LOCTR any
How about if you define the immediate field by simply multiplying the fill
character by 16 megs? Assuming that the destination symbol has an implicit
length, you could encapsulate this into a macro with just the destination and
fill character as operands:
MACRO
&L WIPE &DEST,&
IST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Complex immediate fields
Back in he Assembler XF era I would code something like
LAR0,L'DEST
LAR1,DEST
XRR15,R15
ICM R15,8,=C' '
MVCL R0,R14
On current hardware there is an IILF (LFI) instr
M
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Complex immediate fields
Back in he Assembler XF era I would code something like
LAR0,L'DEST
LAR1,DEST
XRR15,R15
ICM R15,8,=C' '
MVCL R0,R14
On current hardware there is an IILF (LF
f Tom Harper <16c16a7381bc-dmarc-requ...@listserv.uga.edu>
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2024 1:12 PM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Complex immediate fields
Seymour,
How about this:
LLILH R15,X’4000’
Tom Harper
Phoenix Software International
Sent from my iPhone
> On Ma
Mainframe Assembler List on behalf
of Paul Gilmartin <0014e0e4a59b-dmarc-requ...@listserv.uga.edu>
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2024 1:15 PM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Complex immediate fields
On 3/29/24 10:56:49, Seymour J Metz wrote:
> Ba... I consider
>
>
@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Complex immediate fields
Seymour,
You usage of the even/odd R0/R1 pair appears to be reversed (unless you
intended to zero some memory at whatever location L'DEST resolves to ... not to
worry, it happens to dyslexic programmers like me all the time).
I don't know of
024 3:26 PM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Complex immediate fields
What about (untested)
ShiftLeft24 EQU x'100'
LFI R15,X'40'*ShiftLeft24
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.E
f Seymour J Metz
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2024 2:36 PM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Complex immediate fields
I'll have to try that once I get my userid back.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל חַי
נֵ֣צַח יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל לֹ֥א יְשַׁקֵּ֖ר
_
The example I illustrated with the macro does not appear to have the overflow
issue that Robert mentions ... at least, not with the z390 assembler:
Assembler Listing
00(1/1)1 MACRO
00(1/2)2 &L W
The example I illustrated with the macro does not appear to have the overflow
issue that Robert mentions ... at least, not with the z390 assembler. A
slightly modified example (with LHI instead of LA) follows:
Assembler Listing
00(1/1)1 MACRO
When I first saw "Complex immediate fields", I thought of this code one of our
emulation macros used to generate:
CGIJL R01,132-(L'BKwa_Module+1+L'BK_LPAOS+1),BK250
+ CGHI R01,(1-132-(L'BKwa_Module+1+L'BK_LPAOS+1))-((132-(L'X
+
Wow. Truly impressive.
Mike Shaw
MVS/QuickRef Support Group
Chicago-Soft, Ltd.
On Fri, Mar 29, 2024, 7:48 PM Ngan, Robert (DXC Luxoft)
wrote:
> When I first saw "Complex immediate fields", I thought of this code one of
> our emulation macros used to generate:
>
>
When I compose a reply in Gmail, I have a fixed width font option. Does it
come through below?
(It would be really swell if the Assembler List knew about a fixed-width
font for such examples.)
LISTUSE MAIN ESD=0001 LOC= LEN=01000 REG=F OFF=0 LAB=
00
> On current hardware there is an IILF (LFI) instruction, and I would like to
> use it instead of the XR/ICM sequence. I consider
>
> LFI R15,X'4000'
>
> to be ugly, and would like to be able to either use an immediate field
> combing CL1 and XL3 pieces or to refer to an EQU defining
> On current hardware there is an IILF (LFI) instruction, and I would like to
>> use it instead of the XR/ICM sequence.
Before using any modern instructions, ask yourself if they are worth the risk.
Does your disaster recovery site guarantee this as a minimum machine level.
Maybe your employer
e instruction stream.
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Jon Perryman
Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2024 11:09 PM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Complex immediate fields
> On current hardwar
On 4/15/24 10:09:06, Charles Mills wrote:
...
And I would never, ever embed data in the instruction stream.
.
I.e. no parameters following the CALL-type instruction?
Don't some library macros (still) do this, bypassing with
a relative (ugh!) branch instruction?
Are instruction pages distin
t you
notify us by reply mail or telephone and delete the original message from your
mail system.
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List on behalf
of Paul Gilmartin <0014e0e4a59b-dmarc-requ...@listserv.uga.edu>
Sent: April 15, 2024 13:37
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@
-Original Message-
>From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On
>Behalf Of Jon Perryman
>Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2024 11:09 PM
>To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
>Subject: Re: Complex immediate fields
>
>> On current hardware there is an II
ril 14, 2024 11:09 PM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Complex immediate fields
On current hardware there is an IILF (LFI) instruction, and I would like to
use it instead of the XR/ICM sequence.
Before using any modern instructions, ask yourself if they are worth the risk.
Do
ct: Re: Complex immediate fields
Charles is right. IILF was first documented in the -08 level of the POO, for
the z114/z196. z/OS 2.2 was the last release to run on that hardware, and has
been unsupported since 2020-09-30. The extended mnemonic LFI was added later,
but that isn't relevant.
I don
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List on behalf
of Gary Weinhold
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2024 2:06 PM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Complex immediate fields
From a performance and sometimes readability point of view, having constants
(whether instructions or operands
On 4/15/24 20:31:33, Seymour J Metz wrote:
Expect a performance hit if you modify instructions. I like to use LOCTR to
keep data physically remote but visually near the instructions that use them.
.
LOCTR is a boon for reading source. Perhaps less so for reading dumps.
Are any symbolic debugg
Gil asked
Are instruction pages REFReshable?
z/OS does not refresh anything (be that instruction or data), whether the
module is identified as refreshable or not.
The only thing z/OS now pays attention to with respect to the refreshable
option relates to the REFRPROT option, for which the whol
hat single base register will handle both LOCTR's.
Robert Ngan
DXC/Luxoft
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List On Behalf
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2024 22:07
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Complex immediate fields
On 4/15/24 20:3
On 4/18/2024 12:45 PM, Ngan, Robert (DXC Luxoft) wrote:
Assuming you have an assembly listing, you just need to look at the "R-Loc"
(i.e. offset) value.
We use two LOCTR's for data, one for data that needs to be within 4K of the
base register, and another for data referenced with relative lon
30 matches
Mail list logo