Some years ago I produced a suggested design for fixing the SETA symbol substitution "feature" of losing any minus sign but I hadn't got round to implementing it by the time I retired (because of low customer priority), and I don't know if it is on the future schedule. If I remember correctly, it worked as follows (where keywords are provisional):
- A new option COMPAT(SETAABS), where the NOSETAABS option includes the minus sign (although for compatibility within a release the default must remain compatible). - A new option FLAG(SETAABS) which would issue a warning whenever a negative SETA value is substituted into assembler text (regardless of the COMPAT setting). Again, for compatibility the default must be NOSETAABS. I hope the HLASM team still watch this list, so feel free to comment on what you think of the design and whether you think it would be a justifiable use of development resources. Jonathan Scott -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin Sent: 17 February 2026 16:35 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Apparent Test Under Mask Failure ... The requirement for "bug-for-bug compatibility" is what led, in my perception, to the unforgivable behavior of reference to a SETA symbol's taking its absolute value by default. That oversight should have been repaired, not institutionalized. I enthusiastically support any tightening of syntax checking to enforce conformance with the specification. -- gil
