I don't get this. What is the difference of allowed operand formats
in the register operands in LA and the numbers in the AL.4 constant ?
Or the displacement in LA and the displacement in the Y address constant?
Am 21.12.2013 22:27, schrieb I.W.:
> As the OP, the version leveraging a similar instruction is infinitely more
> useful to me as it allows the assembler to deal with the multitude of operand
> formats rather than making me have to.
> ------ Original Message ------
> Received: 04:16 PM COT, 12/21/2013
> From: M.B.
> To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> Subject: Re: macros to implement opcodes
>> Stepping back from everything that's already been suggested, when I wrote
>> this from scratch, I used something simpler:
>> MACRO ,
>> &LABEL DIAG &RX,&RY,&DISP
>> &LABEL DC 0H,X'83',AL.4(&RX,&RY),Y(&DISP)
>> MEND ,
>> The overwriting of another instruction seems unneccesarily complex. I'm
>> guessing that the intent was to allow the assembler to produce register
>> cross-reference entries, but some Diags use only Rx and not Ry, some use an
>> implied Rx+1 and Ry+1, etc., which means that (the lack of) any
>> cross-reference entries can't be trusted anyway. If the overwriting was
>> done for another reason, hopefully someone will let me know.
>> - mb