On Thu, 2013-03-07 at 09:11 -0800, Lloyd Fuller wrote:
> There were several of us working on the SHARE requirements.
I've kept the mailing list for the requirements committee, and there are
79 names on it - including yours and Shmuel's. There was a lot of
interest in the SLAC mods at the time.
>
y and not Greg's
way.
Lloyd
- Original Message
From: Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Thu, March 7, 2013 9:24:34 AM
Subject: Re: Where current HLASM doc?
In <1362595274.25094.yahoomai...@web181403.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>, on
03/06/2013
at 10:41
In <1362595274.25094.yahoomai...@web181403.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>, on
03/06/2013
at 10:41 AM, Lloyd Fuller said:
>In fact many of the feature upgrades from H Assembler to HLASM came
>from the SLAC mods descriptions as we wrote SHARE requirements for
>those features.
In at least one case Greg's
In <9933210527218233.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu>, on
03/06/2013
at 08:20 AM, Paul Gilmartin said:
>Why is this discussion taking place here ratner than on
>ASSEMBLER-LIST?
Why not? It is on topic.
>F Assembler? Assembler VS?
ITYM XF.
>Assembler VS was known as IFOX00, IIRC.
A
In <1631048133608148.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu>, on
03/05/2013
at 05:24 PM, Paul Gilmartin said:
>If you don't find it in the Index, look very
>carefully through the entire catalogue.
Keep in mind the traditional application of said catalog.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.)
In
<985915eee6984740ae93f8495c624c6c21f37ff...@jscpcwexmaa1.bsg.ad.adp.com>,
on 03/05/2013
at 02:18 PM, "Farley, Peter x23353"
said:
>Sometimes I wish they had not done away with TNL's (yeah, I know it's
>impractical in an age of electronic books,
It is not, however, impractical to include up
On 3/6/2013 5:17 PM, Clark Morris wrote:
Should there be a SHARE requirement that all APARs that update
documentation also cause an update to the related manuals? In these
days of electronic documents, that should be relatively inexpensive
and not cause a massive distribution of paper manuals.
On 5 Mar 2013 15:31:23 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
>On Tue, 5 Mar 2013 16:16:50 -0500, John Gilmore wrote:
>>
>>It does not much interest IBM's management, I suspect because it is
>>not the focus of 'interesting' activity. Moreover, it is not a profit
>>center. It generates no ide
John,
I think your numbers are pretty much OK,
We also used asmH (IEV90) for something unique. Its too long and
intricate to go into here. Suffice it to say we had clerks creating
SQL "like" inquiries )asm H macros) and would run these in a batch
mode that would take 48 hours or more (elaps
eams thought that current documentation for a supported IBM product
would be a research project.
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2013 6:20 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
S
On 3/6/2013 9:20 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
F Assembler? Assembler VS? Assembler VS was known as IFOX00, IIRC.
I once had a manual that explained the differences. It got left behind in
a move.
I've never heard IFOX00 called the VS assembler; it's always been the XF
assembler in my crowd. The
: John Gilmore
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Wed, March 6, 2013 9:02:36 AM
Subject: Re: Where current HLASM doc?
The H Assembler at least was once charged for.
The cost was always nominal, US$150 per month is what I remember, but
I should not wish to be hanged if that number is wrong. It was
On Wed, 6 Mar 2013 09:15:39 -0600, Jim Elliott, IBM wrote:
>On Wed, 6 Mar 2013 07:46:08 -0600, Tom Marchant wrote:
>
>>It would be nice if the page at
>>http://www.vm.ibm.com/devpages/jelliott/cmosproc.html
>>would be updated to include the HLASM opcode table that is
>>appropriate for each model.
utton link!
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Tony Harminc
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 5:32 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Where current HLASM doc?
On 5 March 2013 17:03, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
> I don't
The usual suspects would be responding even if this thread were moved
to the assembler list. The only effect at this late point in time
would be to fracture the archives.
John Gilmore, Ashland, MA 01721 - USA
--
For IBM-MAIN sub
On Wed, 6 Mar 2013 08:20:20 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>Why is this discussion taking place here ratner than on
>ASSEMBLER-LIST?
Because the OP asked his question on this list. Does it
make sense to move it to another list?
--
Tom Marchant
--
On Wed, 6 Mar 2013 07:46:08 -0600, Tom Marchant
wrote:
>HLASM hasn't really changed. It would be nice if the page at
>http://www.vm.ibm.com/devpages/jelliott/cmosproc.html
>would be updated to include the HLASM opcode table that is
>appropriate for each model. It would also be nice if the HLA
Why is this discussion taking place here ratner than on
ASSEMBLER-LIST?
On Wed, 6 Mar 2013 09:02:31 -0500, John Gilmore wrote:
>The H Assembler at least was once charged for.
>
>The cost was always nominal, US$150 per month is what I remember, but
>I should not wish to be hanged if that number is
The H Assembler at least was once charged for.
The cost was always nominal, US$150 per month is what I remember, but
I should not wish to be hanged if that number is wrong. It was widely
used because it did SYSGENs, NCPGENs, and the like very much faster
than the F Assembler.
John Gilmore, Ashla
Paul Gilmartin wrote:
I had understood that, new with MVS/XA, HLASM was not "'given away'
as a part of the operating system", but a separately priced prerequisite.
Has that changed, or was I mistaken?
The 1980's were a long time ago (smile), and I'm not going to look up
the history of wheth
>Thank you for that link. I was not aware that IBM made closed APAR
>documentation available to the public.
>
>I still think it is wrong for two major machine upgrades to have occurred and
>yet none of the HLASM manuals was updated.
>
HLASM hasn't really changed. It would be nice if the page a
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 5:31 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>
> TNLs? Did someone say it's harder to update electronic documentation
> than hardcopy? Fairly long ago, I understood that in parts of the
> aviation service industry mechanics were allowed to print hardcopies
> of electronic manuals, but t
On Tue, 5 Mar 2013 16:16:50 -0500, John Gilmore wrote:
>
>It does not much interest IBM's management, I suspect because it is
>not the focus of 'interesting' activity. Moreover, it is not a profit
>center. It generates no identifiable revenue stream; it is instead
>'given away' as a part of the o
On Tue, 5 Mar 2013 11:36:45 -0800, Ed Jaffe wrote:
>On 3/5/2013 11:18 AM, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
>> PMFJI here, but documenting important changes only in an APAR leaves out all
>> of the application programmers like myself who have no access to the APAR
>> documentation site, which is restr
On 5 March 2013 17:03, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
> I don't have access to PSP buckets.
You may well have. Try
http://www14.software.ibm.com/webapp/set2/psearch/search?domain=psp,
and use HLASM as the search argument. But I'm not sure how useful the
results are.
> I'm an application guy, not a
n Behalf
Of Ed Gould
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 4:39 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Where current HLASM doc?
On Mar 5, 2013, at 3:19 PM, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
> Thank you for that link. I was not aware that IBM made closed APAR
> documentation available to the public.
On Mar 5, 2013, at 3:19 PM, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
Thank you for that link. I was not aware that IBM made closed APAR
documentation available to the public.
I still think it is wrong for two major machine upgrades to have
occurred and yet none of the HLASM manuals was updated.
But I
ssage-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Bob Rutledge
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 3:44 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Where current HLASM doc?
Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
> PMFJI here, but documenting important changes only in
It is clear that the HLASM publications budget is not luxurious, but
that is of a piece with the fact that the HLASM is itself on a
bare-subsistence budget.
It does not much interest IBM's management, I suspect because it is
not the focus of 'interesting' activity. Moreover, it is not a profit
ce
Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
PMFJI here, but documenting important changes only in an APAR leaves out all of
the application programmers like myself who have no access to the APAR
documentation site, which is restricted to systems programmers with valid IBM
logons.
http://www14.software.ibm.c
ssion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Ed Jaffe
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 11:37 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Where current HLASM doc?
On 3/5/2013 11:18 AM, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
> PMFJI here, but documenting important changes only in an APAR leaves
On 3/5/2013 11:18 AM, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
PMFJI here, but documenting important changes only in an APAR leaves out all of
the application programmers like myself who have no access to the APAR
documentation site, which is restricted to systems programmers with valid IBM
logons.
I was
.
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Tom Marchant
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 11:06 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Where current HLASM doc?
On Tue, 5 Mar 2013 12:57:21 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wrote
All from 2008.
Ah, 2008! Remember those fabulous z10's?
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Kevin Minerley
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 9:42 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Where current HLAS
h, IMHO.
Peter
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Tom Marchant
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 2:06 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Where current HLASM doc?
On Tue, 5 Mar 2013 12:57:21 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>
On Tue, 5 Mar 2013 12:57:21 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>Are there OPTABLE values that distinguish between z196 and zEC12?
>(Is there even a difference?) If so, are these documented?
>The best I can find in the v1R6 Programmer's Guide is ZOP, ZS3, ZS4;
>2008 information.
As someone said, that s
On Tue, 5 Mar 2013 11:44:18 -0600, Tom Marchant wrote:
>On Tue, 5 Mar 2013 09:20:47 -0800, Charles Mills wrote:
>
>>And none of the below is an answer to my question: where are HLASM docs that
>>cover the ***HLASM*** (not PoP) changes since 2008?
>
>Do you mean like this from the HLASM R6 General
On Tue, 5 Mar 2013 09:20:47 -0800, Charles Mills wrote:
>And none of the below is an answer to my question: where are HLASM docs that
>cover the ***HLASM*** (not PoP) changes since 2008?
Do you mean like this from the HLASM R6 General Information manual?
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bo
The bookshelf we have is at:
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/Shelves/ASMSH030?SEARCHREQUEST=hlasm&TYPE=FUZZY&RANK=RANK&SEARCHTOPIC=TOPIC&SEARCHTEXT=TEXT&SEARCHINDEX=INDEX&CASE=alcse913
which includes:
ASMTIC20HLASM V1R6 Toolkit Feature Installation Guide
ASMI1020
AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Where current HLASM doc?
Tom Marchant wrote:
AFAIK, Addressing modes, instruction formats and syntax for machine
instructions are documented in the Principles of Operation, not HLASM doc.
and this is the impoortant point that needs to be made here
Tom Marchant wrote:
AFAIK, Addressing modes, instruction formats and syntax for machine
instructions are documented in the Principles of Operation, not HLASM
doc.
and this is the impoortant point that needs to be made here.
In, general, of course, there are interactions. The formats of
consta
On Mon, 4 Mar 2013 10:45:29 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>And, did zEC12 indroduce no new addressing modes nor instruction
>formats that might affect syntax described in HLASM doc?
AFAIK, Addressing modes, instruction formats and syntax for
machine instructions are documented in the Principles o
04, 2013 12:30 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Where current HLASM doc?
Charles Mills wrote:
> My z/OS R13 collection contains HLASM documentation from 2008. Is
> there current HLASM documentation? Or has HLASM just not been updated?
> (I notice my z/OS R13 listings say &
Yes. I'm looking for the documentation.
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of DanD
Sent: Monday, March 04, 2013 4:03 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Where current HLASM doc?
Charles,
Are you usin
Charles,
Are you using the "OPTABLE" PARM keyword? That will restrict the
instructions available to you.
Dan
-Original Message-
From: Charles Mills
How does one "turn on" the new op codes, then? My (z/OS R13 collection)
HLASM documentation of the MACHINE option (for example) ends
Charles Mills wrote:
My z/OS R13 collection contains HLASM documentation from 2008. Is there
current HLASM documentation? Or has HLASM just not been updated? (I notice
my z/OS R13 listings say "R6.0.") I find that hard to believe. There could
not possibly be no HLASM that supported post z10 op co
Behalf
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Monday, March 04, 2013 11:45 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Where current HLASM doc?
On Mon, 4 Mar 2013 08:23:43 -0800, Charles Mills wrote:
>I'm utterly clear on the role of the POP versus the role of the HLASM doc.
>
>How does one &qu
On Mon, 4 Mar 2013 08:23:43 -0800, Charles Mills wrote:
>I'm utterly clear on the role of the POP versus the role of the HLASM doc.
>
>How does one "turn on" the new op codes, then? My (z/OS R13 collection)
>HLASM documentation of the MACHINE option (for example) ends with
>"ZSERIES-4 Same as MAC
Well, it has the 1.13 manuals for z/OS in it ...
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Bob Shannon
Sent: Monday, March 04, 2013 8:26 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Where current HLASM doc?
>How d
>How does one "turn on" the new op codes, then? My (z/OS R13 collection) HLASM
>documentation of the MACHINE option (for example) ends with
>"ZSERIES-4 Same as MACHINE(ZSERIES-3) but with the addition of support for the
>z10 instructions."
Are you using the collection for 1.3 or for 1.13?
Bob
support for
the z10 instructions."
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Steve Comstock
Sent: Monday, March 04, 2013 7:36 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Where current HLASM doc?
On 3/4/2013 8:2
On 3/4/2013 8:26 AM, Charles Mills wrote:
My z/OS R13 collection contains HLASM documentation from 2008. Is there
current HLASM documentation? Or has HLASM just not been updated? (I notice
my z/OS R13 listings say "R6.0.") I find that hard to believe. There could
not possibly be no HLASM that sup
My z/OS R13 collection contains HLASM documentation from 2008. Is there
current HLASM documentation? Or has HLASM just not been updated? (I notice
my z/OS R13 listings say "R6.0.") I find that hard to believe. There could
not possibly be no HLASM that supported post z10 op codes.
Charles
---
53 matches
Mail list logo
