On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Chris Craddock <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 13:37:31 -0600 > > From: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: Base-less programming > > To: [email protected] > > > <snip>> > > > > Am I reading the book right? > > > > > > > No. Although the assembled instructions have the displacement in half > > words, your source code should still use the original "offset". HLASM > > itself will halve the value. And it will complain bitterly if the offset > is > > not even. So you just replace the B??? with J??? and leave the operand > > itself alone. > > Well.. yes, but being pedantic; how about just using a label?!? I cringe > whenever I see carefully crafted branch statements with instruction > lengths. That's trivially broken by any down-stream change, whereas a label > as a jump or branch target will never be wrong - no matter how much the > code changes in between. Make your own and the next poor fool's job easier. > Just saying.... > CC Well, I don't _usually_ use the *+<some value>. I normally use a label with the &SYSNDX symbol embedded somewhere in it. But I didn't want to "muddy the waters", and instead make the point that the source operand itself did not, and possibly should not, be changed. -- This is clearly another case of too many mad scientists, and not enough hunchbacks. Maranatha! <>< John McKown
