We have just shipped APAR PH50915, an enhancement to code page
support, which makes it possible to identify the source code
page and specify the object code pages to be used for EBCDIC,
ASCII and Unicode constants (now including UTF-8):
https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/apar/PH50915
Additional
On 2/9/23 05:56:28, Jonathan Scott wrote:
We have just shipped APAR PH50915, an enhancement to code page
support, ...
https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/apar/PH50915
Thanks. Will this, by clarification, relax restrictions on the use
of ASCII self-defining terms, such as:
MVI L,
gil writes:
> Thanks. Will this, by clarification, relax restrictions on the use
> of ASCII self-defining terms, such as:
>
> MVI L,CA'x'
ASCII and Unicode self-defining terms have been supported in
assembly expressions since PI89365 in 2017. With the latest fix
PH50915 they are also
On 2/9/23 08:06:41, Jonathan Scott wrote:
gil writes:
Thanks. Will this, by clarification, relax restrictions on the use
of ASCII self-defining terms, such as:
MVI L,CA'x'
ASCII and Unicode self-defining terms have been supported in
assembly expressions since PI89365 in 2017. W
Any reference to an ASCII or Unicode term where the value
contains characters outside the invariant EBCDIC character set
will clearly have a value which depends on the EBCDIC code page
in which the source was written. This means that it is not
possible to determine the binary value of such a const
On 2/13/23 02:51:52, Jonathan Scott wrote:
Any reference to an ASCII or Unicode term where the value
contains characters outside the invariant EBCDIC character set
will clearly have a value which depends on the EBCDIC code page
in which the source was written. This means that it is not
possible
Ref: Your note of Mon, 13 Feb 2023 09:23:37 -0700
gil writes:
> Wouldn't that limitation have applied to EBCDIC terms contains characters
> outside the invariant EBCDIC character set? such as:
> CLI L,C'['or:
> DCC'['
> where it is not possible to determine the binar
.
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU]
On Behalf Of Jonathan Scott
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2023 8:36 AM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: HLASM code page support enhancements
Ref: Your note of Mon, 13 Feb 202
On 2/13/2023 9:27 AM, Charles Mills wrote:
Any reliance on the visible glyph as an unambiguous indication of the
underlying bit pattern is going to be fraught.
I know for absolute fact that my 3270 emulators and ISPF are properly
synchronized to correctly process and display characters using t
The real question is why, but really why, IBM had to introduce this EBCDIC
horror, where symbols like [,], ^ and some less signifacant ones moved around
like dry leaves in the fall wind. Why didn't IBM jist left them in one place.I
did never find any explanation, let alone logical explanation.
r List on behalf
of Ze'ev Atlas <01774d97d104-dmarc-requ...@listserv.uga.edu>
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2023 1:09 PM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: HLASM code page support enhancements
The real question is why, but really why, IBM had to introduce this EBCDIC
horro
On 2/13/23 11:29:23, Seymour J Metz wrote:
It's awful in the mainframe world, but it's also awful in the PC world.
Multiple code pages matching ASCII or ISCII in 0-127 and chaotic everywhere
else. Maybe z/OS should move to UTF-8 as the standard code page.
+1 for UTF-8.
I have two desktop sy
DU
Subject: Re: HLASM code page support enhancements
The real question is why, but really why, IBM had to introduce this EBCDIC
horror, where symbols like [,], ^ and some less signifacant ones moved around
like dry leaves in the fall wind. Why didn't IBM jist left them in one place.I
did
Ze'ev Atlas wrote:
> The real question is why, but really why, IBM had to introduce
> this EBCDIC horror, where symbols like [,], ^ and some less
> signifacant ones moved around dry leaves in the fall wind.
That's a bit off-topic, but the answer is "Compatibility".
Old physical printers and termi
The switching of those three characters, used widely in regex, is not only
confusing, it is a disaster.ZA
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 2:30 PM, Jonathan Scott
wrote: Ze'ev Atlas wrote:
> The real question is why, but really why, IBM had to introduce
> this EBCDI
C was not the first language to use [].
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List on behalf
of Jonathan Scott
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2023 1:35 PM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: HLASM code page support enhancements
Ze'ev Atlas
On Feb 13, 2023, at 12:55:45, Seymour J Metz wrote:
C was not the first language to use [].
Algol-60? IBM was enthusiastic about Algol early in the s/360 era.
--
gil
ASCII-EBCDIC is on my Time Machine list (you know, "Kill Hitler; avoid the
ASCII-EBCDIC dichotomy; no null-terminated strings in C." - you'll have your
own items).
Note that UTF-8 is not a code page; it's an encoding for all of Unicode. To
convert z/OS to use Unicode at this point would requir
On 2/13/23 13:10:42, Phil Smith III wrote:
Just be glad that the basic character set is fixed in EBCDIC code pages.
Imagine if A-Z moved around!
That might be good. It would motivate the designers to fix the damned
problem. Or adopt the solution in widespread use.
--
gil
On Mon, 13 Feb 2023 at 14:30, Jonathan Scott
wrote:
> Ze'ev Atlas wrote:
> > The real question is why, but really why, IBM had to introduce
> > this EBCDIC horror, where symbols like [,], ^ and some less
> > signifacant ones moved around dry leaves in the fall wind.
>
>
> That's a bit off-topi
On Mon, 13 Feb 2023 at 13:10, Ze'ev Atlas <
01774d97d104-dmarc-requ...@listserv.uga.edu> wrote:
> The real question is why, but really why, IBM had to introduce this EBCDIC
> horror, where symbols like [,], ^ and some less signifacant ones moved
> around like dry leaves in the fall wind. Why
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List
> On Behalf Of Ze'ev Atlas
> Sent: 13 February 2023 18:10
> To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> Subject: Re: HLASM code page support enhancements
>
> The real question is why, but really why, IBM
> I believe that the real answer is that IBM didn't introduce these
characters, "users", I think mainly universities found they needed them and
so tweaked their systems so they could be used.
Yes! Remember the various print trains:
http://www.quadibloc.com/comp/lineint.htm
Where can I find that publication?
Ze'ev Atlas
On Monday, February 13, 2023 at 04:09:47 PM EST, Tony Harminc
wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2023 at 13:10, Ze'ev Atlas <
01774d97d104-dmarc-requ...@listserv.uga.edu> wrote:
> The real question is why, but really why, IBM had to introduce th
Can I quote you in my documentation, please
Ze'ev Atlas
On Monday, February 13, 2023 at 02:30:57 PM EST, Jonathan Scott
wrote:
Ze'ev Atlas wrote:
> The real question is why, but really why, IBM had to introduce
> this EBCDIC horror, where symbols like [,], ^ and some less
> signifaca
On 2/13/23 11:35:23, Jonathan Scott wrote:
Ze'ev Atlas wrote:
The real question is why, but really why, IBM had to introduce
this EBCDIC horror, where symbols like [,], ^ and some less
signifacant ones moved around dry leaves in the fall wind.
That's a bit off-topic, but the answer is "Compat
GilYou are correct of course. When I ported PCRE to Classic z/OS I had in mind
the poor souls who are forced to work in Classic z/OS, JCL, Rexx. TSO, EBCDIC
and all. But yes, I wish that IBM would find a fool proof way to bring those
poor souls and their arcane systems to the twenty first cent
Gil wrote, re the "basic" characters moving around in EBCDIC code pages:
>That might be good. It would motivate the designers to fix the damned
>problem. Or adopt the solution in widespread use.
It might have motivated them to switch to ASCII in 1975 or so (random year,
don't pick at me for it!)
I [li...@akphs.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2023 12:40 AM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: HLASM code page support enhancements
Gil wrote, re the "basic" characters moving around in EBCDIC code pages:
>That might be good. It would motivate the designers to fix the damned
&
, February 13, 2023 11:52 PM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: HLASM code page support enhancements
On 2/13/23 11:35:23, Jonathan Scott wrote:
> Ze'ev Atlas wrote:
>> The real question is why, but really why, IBM had to introduce
>> this EBCDIC horror, where symbols
Can I quote your answer verbstim in my documentation
Ze'ev Atlas
On Monday, February 13, 2023 at 02:30:57 PM EST, Jonathan Scott
wrote:
Ze'ev Atlas wrote:
> The real question is why, but really why, IBM had to introduce
> this EBCDIC horror, where symbols like [,], ^ and some less
>
On Mon, 13 Feb 2023 at 21:41, Ze'ev Atlas <
01774d97d104-dmarc-requ...@listserv.uga.edu> wrote:
> Where can I find that publication?
> Ze'ev Atlas
>
Good question. I scanned my paper copy some time last year, I think, and
I'm pretty certain I uploaded it to Bitsavers. But I don't see it there
32 matches
Mail list logo
