IBM Mainframe Forum

follow on to a previous post

Some field testing shows SAV15 was used to prevent the message from disrupting what was in register 15, probably because of the nature of the subroutine.

no field test would have been needed, if You had read the manuals,
the comments about console and log contents were PROBLEM DETERMINATION
and the SAV15 stupp was the PROBLEM RESOLUTION

Stupid subroutines, they're not like higher level functions/methods... Oh well, my bad for expecting assembler to act like compiled code. An update is below:

well in assembler a program/subroutine is only as smart/stupid as the programmer writing them,
do not blame the innocent ones, You did everything by Yourself
strange that after so many posts You have not understood that assembler...
DOES ABSOLUTELY NOTHING FOR THE LOGIC AND YOU ARE IN CONTROL ALL THE TIME

These users thanked the author enrico-sorichetti for the post:

RISCCISCInstSet (Mon Nov 12, 2012 4:50 am)

OMG ( Oh My God )... You are really thick as a brick

can You notice the different situation
between ( the initial SUMRTN code )

the ( fixed SUMRTN code )

and ( the last SUMRTN code )

just explain why You save R15 when it is not used inside SUMRTN ...


You must really change Your ways...
right now You are just picking instructions here and there and patch them together in the hope that something will work...
the above snippet sequence demonstrates it.... it is not the right way of doing things

with all the replies and suggestions You have received up to now in all the topics You started, You should have done a better job in understanding and doing things
unfortunately it is not so... we spent a lot of time explaining, posting snippets, links and excerpts from the manuals
but the results sadly do not correspond to the effort done from our side, meditate a bit on all Your TOPICS and review Your way of doing things

These users thanked the author enrico-sorichetti for the post:

RISCCISCInstSet (Mon Nov 12, 2012 4:50 am)

enrico, there are "students" who simply won't learn -- they expect that by throwing enough random code pieces together they can get something to pass the class. I think we've found one of these "students". I, for one, will waste no further time on this waste of classroom space!

These users thanked the author Robert Sample for the post:

RISCCISCInstSet (Mon Nov 12, 2012 4:50 am)

I think we've found one of these "students".

and this one even started complaining about the manners of people trying to help him

These users thanked the author enrico-sorichetti for the post:

RISCCISCInstSet (Mon Nov 12, 2012 4:50 am)

Okay - I don't want to act like a cheater so -

Do you remember that? I was examining code and going out of my way to learn. I'm trying to pay more attention to previous posts (not with success I like - if that ticks you off jump in a lake)

Anyway it sounds like your community has had enough questions about subroutines, and I think I've gotten a reasonable amount of information, so this topic shall now be stopped. Thank all contributers for your help.

(BTW I am not a "waste of classroom space;" I try to learn; @enrico I thought flaming was against the rules - someone should clarify how the rules work here)

deleted
posted to the wrong forum

These users thanked the author enrico-sorichetti for the post:

RISCCISCInstSet (Mon Nov 12, 2012 4:50 am)

RISCCISCInstSet wrote:Stupid subroutines, they're not like higher level functions/methods... Oh well, my bad for expecting assembler to act like compiled code. [,,,]

I think you need a bit of background reading on Assemblers in general.

A computer chip has an instruction set. Short of hand-producing the object-code, an assembler is the lowest level language you'll get. The language-elements are of a simple structure and "mnemonic" in nature. Writing in assembler is rigorous and unforgiving. And time-consuming. One assembler line, one instruction in the object-code. Macros are one of the things which make assembler bearable. The system macros, or your own, aid you in generating multiple instructions for standard pieces of work. Another thing is the ability to use sub-routines, either internal or even programs written in Assembler or other languages.

These days people don't generally decide to pick-up an Assembler language for fun. For those learning, the intention will generally be to use it for work purposes. Usually this would be with a formal course, backed-up by in-house training for the "local standards". That last is vital. More so that other languages, there are more ways than one to skin a cat in Assembler, you've been shown an example of this above. You can't (so easily) pick-and-choose - you have to learn all the basic things, and to know how to do the same thing in multiple different ways. Make sure you fully understand what Steve Myers was saying about the SR and the LA. You don't have to test the condition code immediately after the instruction which set it, but you don't want to blat it to something else before you do, so in the good-ole-POP note those that set the condition code and those that don't. Did you get a "yellow/green card"? This is your pocket reference for much that you will need to know, including knowing which instructions set the condition code.

At one site, your style (once you develop one) might fit in nicely, at 20 other sites, the way everybody else does it will be different, if you are not flexible, you will look like a "newbie" anyway.

It might help if we know your purpose in learning Assembler. Don't give a dumb answer, that won't help at all

These users thanked the author BillyBoyo for the post:

RISCCISCInstSet (Mon Nov 12, 2012 4:50 am)

Program has been solved; I used a non-work register:

Program has been solved; I used a non-work register:

Make that general purpose register.

Hello,

Stupid subroutines, they're not like higher level functions/methods... Oh well, my bad for expecting assembler to act like compiled code.

Ah, Ummm, NO the subroutines are not stupid. . . They just don't work the way you want them to and, so far, you are still trying to get the "world" to change rather than following the more than 40 years evolution (which was "standard" more than 35 years ago. Why might you "expect" a green plant to act like a brown deer? Possibly i do not understand what you meant. . .

Do you remember that? I was examining code and going out of my way to learn.

What an oxymoron. If you are trying to learning new things, how can that be "out of your way".

I'm trying to pay more attention to previous posts (not with success I like - if that ticks you off jump in a lake)

Should have been your starting point - not somewher you finally stumboed to.

Anyway it sounds like your community has had enough questions about subroutines

No. We are quite happy to pursue properly presented questions/problems. We even go "out of our way to help the clueless" (as your drag-on topics demonstrate).

so this topic shall now be stopped.

Yes, it will - and not because of your request/demand/whine/rant/whatever.

Your future posts will be reviewed and none like this one will be tolerated again.

d

These users thanked the author dick scherrer for the post:

RISCCISCInstSet (Mon Nov 12, 2012 4:51 am)