Dave,
My question is: "Why are you trying to write non-maintainable code?
I.e., you are getting fancy for no real reason.
Just make it a simple EQU and CLI so the next guy reading the code will
not have to spend an hour figuring out what should have been a simple CLI.
Tony Thigpen
President
Thigpen Enterprises
David Clark wrote on 2/16/26 2:45 PM:
Can someone please explain to me how the following fails to drop through to
the actual test for C5? The request at d'8000' is 'E' (x'C5', b'11000101')
but the code is taking the 'D' (x'C4', b'11000100') branch. Why?
The condition code should result in mixed -- not ones. Am I going to have
to change from bit mask testing to 'CLI' testing?
000872 91C4 8000 00000 1842+ TM
REQU_DELETE,L'REQU_DELETE
000876 A714 0124 00ABE 1843+ JO TXTDLET
...snip...
0008C2 91C5 8000 00000 1994+ TM
REQU_2EBCDIC,L'REQU_2EBCDIC
0008C6 A714 02D7 00E74 1995+ JO TXT2EBC
The bit mask flags are defined as follows--using my own macros based on the
late Dr. John Ehrman's SHARE presentation on the subject.
000000 300=TXTREQU DS CL1
00000 000C4 308+REQU_DELETE EQU *-1,C'D'
00000 000C5 310+REQU_2EBCDIC EQU *-1,C'E'
...snip...
Sincerely,
Dave Clark
