Hi Peter.

Elsewhere, you are being quoted as an authority figure
and debate is still in progress.

Could you please concede that VD is valid HLASM syntax as per:

Can you look at 
https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.1.0?topic=instruction-subfield-3-type-extension


Thanks. Paul.





On Sat, 16 Aug 2025 21:02:37 +0000, Peter Relson <[email protected]> wrote:

><snip>On page 199 I can see V() references in the RLD.Where are VD() 
>references documented?</snip>
>There is no 8-byte V-Con (a la "VD").There is an 8-byte A-con ("AD") and that 
>can be used in conjunction with an EXTRN statement for an external reference, 
>just as a 4-byte A-con can be used in conjunction with an EXTRN statement for 
>an external reference.
><snip>Since RMODE is not documented for ATTACHX, RMODE64 is not supported. 
>Therefore, R14 will never be above the bar (64 bit address). First and 
>foremost, it says R14 is "return address" which implies R14 will always be a 
>valid address regardless of the AMODE.  </snip>False. That says you must not 
>invoke ATTACHX in RMODE64. That has nothing to do with whether the target 
>module can be RMODE64.  Similarly, if ATTACHX could not be invoked in AMODE 
>64, that would have nothing to do with whether the target can be AMODE64 (I 
>think ATTACHX can be, but the point remains)
>AMODE 64 and RMODE 64 do not require GOFF and do not require program object, 
>IIRC.
>RLD references, when appropriate, can be 8-byte. There is an "extended" bit 
>that is on, in addition to the normal bit(s) that might indicate 2, 3, 4-byte.
>Peter Relson
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to