On 2/17/26 14:27, Jonathan Scott wrote:
... From my previous research, cases which would be impacted by NOCOMPAT(SETAABS) are probably very rare, and the FLAG(SETAABS) option could be used to track them down. One would have to do further testing to find out whether for example IBM product macros would need COMPAT(SETAABS). Sometimes IBM product macros have been changed to tolerate the use of new HLASM options, such as FLAG(PAGE0). And most COMPAT and FLAG options can be changed locally using ACONTROL if necessary.The idea of introducing a signed variant of SETA seems totally disproportionate when all that's needed is an option to keep the sign. ...
IBM might adapt its code to work under all settings of (hypothetical) new options. But it would impose a similar toleration burden on customer and ISV customer-facing code. I can't envision that a new variant of SETA would be more costly to implement than new options. -- gil
