Re: better way? C language x'00' delimited string.

2016-07-01 Thread Ed Jaffe
On 6/28/2016 11:36 AM, Gord Tomlin wrote: Another good reason to use a macro. The macro could include: PUSH PRINT PRINT NOGEN bla bla bla POP PRINT Or even: PUSH PRINT,NOPRINT PRINT NOGEN,NOPRINT bla bla bla POP

Re: better way? C language x'00' delimited string.

2016-06-30 Thread Tom Marchant
On Tue, 28 Jun 2016 14:36:49 -0400, Gord Tomlin wrote: >On 2016-06-28 13:53, John P. Hartmann wrote: >> Oh yes, the null will be. > >Another good reason to use a macro. The macro could include: > PUSH PRINT > PRINT NOGEN > bla bla bla > POP PRINT I

Re: better way? C language x'00' delimited string.

2016-06-28 Thread Gord Tomlin
On 2016-06-28 13:53, John P. Hartmann wrote: Oh yes, the null will be. It will be in the line below your DC where the assembler prints the expanded statement. On 06/28/2016 05:45 PM, John McKown wrote: Even after assembling, the will be in the listing not an actual x'00'. Another good

Re: better way? C language x'00' delimited string.

2016-06-28 Thread John P. Hartmann
Oh yes, the null will be. It will be in the line below your DC where the assembler prints the expanded statement. On 06/28/2016 05:45 PM, John McKown wrote: Even after assembling, the will be in the listing not an actual x'00'.

Re: better way? C language x'00' delimited string.

2016-06-28 Thread John McKown
On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 10:27 AM, Tony Harminc wrote: > On 27 June 2016 at 09:04, John McKown > wrote: > > SETC BYTE(00) > > STRING DC 'HELPME' > > > > Not quite as pungent, but better. Does anybody have a better way? Should > I > > just make a

Re: better way? C language x'00' delimited string.

2016-06-28 Thread Tony Harminc
On 27 June 2016 at 09:04, John McKown wrote: > SETC BYTE(00) > STRING DC 'HELPME' > > Not quite as pungent, but better. Does anybody have a better way? Should I > just make a macro, perhaps DCZ, to do the above for me automatically? > > This is more a technique

Re: better way? C language x'00' delimited string.

2016-06-27 Thread Martin Truebner
John, I use STRING_with_term DC C'this is a string',X'0' it has the wrong length attribute (one less) but is easier to decipher than a macro. Martin

Re: better way? C language x'00' delimited string.

2016-06-27 Thread Tony Thigpen
CplusX00 Tony Thigpen John McKown wrote on 06/27/2016 11:20 AM: On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Ze'ev Atlas < 01774d97d104-dmarc-requ...@listserv.uga.edu> wrote: Then you have no choice but nldelstr as your macro name :) ... or should I say :(Za Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android ​Oh,

Re: better way? C language x'00' delimited string.

2016-06-27 Thread Ze'ev Atlas
Then you have no choice but nldelstr as your macro name  :) ... or should I say :(Za Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 10:16 AM, John McKown wrote: On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 8:39 AM, Gord Tomlin < gt.ibm.li...@actionsoftware.com> wrote:

Re: better way? C language x'00' delimited string.

2016-06-27 Thread Gord Tomlin
On 2016-06-27 09:04, John McKown wrote: COBOL has succumbed to C interface by offering the Z'Character String' which automatically puts a x'00' at the end. I want to do this in HLASM. Originally, I did: STRING DS CL7 ORG STRING DC CL6'HELPME' DC X'00' But that is really

Re: better way? C language x'00' delimited string.

2016-06-27 Thread zMan
Use a macro. On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 9:04 AM, John McKown wrote: > COBOL has succumbed to C interface by offering the Z'Character String' > which automatically puts a x'00' at the end. I want to do this in HLASM. > Originally, I did: > > > STRING DS CL7 > ORG

better way? C language x'00' delimited string.

2016-06-27 Thread John McKown
COBOL has succumbed to C interface by offering the Z'Character String' which automatically puts a x'00' at the end. I want to do this in HLASM. Originally, I did: STRING DS CL7 ORG STRING DC CL6'HELPME' DC X'00' But that is really odoriferous. So now I do: SETC BYTE(00)