Skip to Main Content
IBM Z Software


This portal is to open public enhancement requests against IBM Z Software products. To view all of your ideas submitted to IBM, create and manage groups of Ideas, or create an idea explicitly set to be either visible by all (public) or visible only to you and IBM (private), use the IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com).


Shape the future of IBM!

We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:

Search existing ideas

Start by searching and reviewing ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted, and add a comment, vote, or subscribe to updates on them if they matter to you. If you can't find what you are looking for,

Post your ideas
  1. Post an idea.

  2. Get feedback from the IBM team and other customers to refine your idea.

  3. Follow the idea through the IBM Ideas process.


Specific links you will want to bookmark for future use

Welcome to the IBM Ideas Portal (https://www.ibm.com/ideas) - Use this site to find out additional information and details about the IBM Ideas process and statuses.

IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com) - Use this site to view all of your ideas, create new ideas for any IBM product, or search for ideas across all of IBM.

ideasibm@us.ibm.com - Use this email to suggest enhancements to the Ideas process or request help from IBM for submitting your Ideas.

Status Not under consideration
Categories Assembler
Created by Guest
Created on Apr 23, 2015

Flag SS instructions with a (probable) incorrect use of implied operand length

Please consider the following two MVC instructions, both of which use the implied length of the first operand:

MVC FULL1,FULL2 perfectly reasonable
MVC FULL1+2,HALF explicit length of 2 is obviously missing

FULL1 DS F
FULL2 DS F
HALF DS H
*
LTORG

The first MVC instruction is fine, but the second MVC blows away the high-order two bytes of FULL2 with the first two bytes of the literal pool. This is a clear error; the programmer has forgotten to provide an explicit length of 2.

The programmer can specify FLAG(IMPLEN), and HLASM will flag the second MVC. But what's the point? Both MVC instructions will be flagged, as will 95% of all perfectly valid SS-format instructions.

I hope Ed Jaffe (of Phoenix Software) won't mind if I paraphrase a comment he wrote some time ago on an assembler listserv. We need a new assembler option, producing a new diagnostic message. Its function would be similar to FLAG(IMPLEN), but: the new diagnostic message would be produced ONLY when the instruction operand displacement for which an implied length is used differs from that of the field from which the implied length was derived.

Idea priority Medium
  • Guest
    Reply
    |
    Sep 17, 2020

    This RFE is one of a small group which had apparently been set aside incorrectly years ago and subsequently overlooked. We are sorry for the delay.

    As for many types of suggested error check, the situation in the provided example is very clear, but it is not at all easy to come up with a general rule that can distinguish usefully enough between probable error cases and normal cases. For example, if the expression is of the form FIELD-STRUCT+STRUCTAREA this is probably a perfectly normal reference to a field FIELD within a structure mapped by structure STRUCT which has been stored in area STRUCTAREA, and references such as FIELD-L'FIELD and FIELD+L'FIELD might be valid references to the previous and next fields in some table.

    In this case, it might be possible to issue a warning not because of any problem with the first operand but because the second operand length does not match the move length. However, Dr. John Ehrman (the original HLASM planner) said many years ago that when similar warnings were added to a student assembler, they were usually disabled because they gave too many false positives.

    It seems possible that if HLASM could implement a very fine-grained set of warnings which can easily be customized, we might be able to allow users to check for many possible errors while disabling checks which were spuriously triggered by commonly used programming techniques. However, at present we feel that the limited benefits of the suggested checks in this case combined with the work needed to implement them means that we are not likely to address this requirement in the near future, so we are declining it at this point.

    Jonathan Scott, HLASM

  • Guest
    Reply
    |
    Oct 5, 2015

    Due to processing by IBM, this request was reassigned to have the following updated attributes:
    Brand - Servers and Systems Software
    Product family - Enterprise Tooling
    Product - High Level Assembler (HLASM)

    For recording keeping, the previous attributes were:
    Brand - WebSphere
    Product family - Enterprise Tooling
    Product - High Level Assembler (HLASM)

  • Guest
    Reply
    |
    Jun 6, 2015

    This is a good idea and accept that we should look to see what can be added to HLASM to assist.
    Sharuff
    Sharuff Morsa IBM Hursley Labs