开云体育

"This is back to front. HX is recognised while processing an interrupt from the console." I thought HX was an immediate ... so no going back to what we were doing? Joe wrote:

I'm not sure it's wierd. Necessary for certain requirements maybe. Not much argument there. This is back to front. HX is recognised while processing an interrupt from the console. What happens next is

You keep talking about a migration... what migration? 31-bit addressing came around with the IBM 370 series of computers, in a new architecture called 370/XA. It was an evolution on the 370 line, not

Exactly .... but if the high byte was clean and app developers religiously ignored assuming anything about addressability. Well ... the migration could have been seemless (ish).

BTW, you should note that every IBM 360 or 370 is a 32-bit machine. It is only the memory addressing that is 24 bits. The GPRs are all 32 bit, and most of the instructions are 32 bit. So, just because

Interesting ... I didn't know that ... presumably machines didn't have much real storage at that time and it seemed outlandish!

So yes, thats right, the machine that gave birth to VM (back in those days it was called CP/67) had 32-bit addressing! Joe [email protected]> wrote:

"Just think how much easier it would have been to migrate to 32 (yes 32 bit)!" 32-bit was tried by IBM with the 360/67 and it was found there was no appetite for it in the market. If you want to see

What's a bit weird is the way IBM layered their hacks on hacks. And I am not trying to cause controversy because we all know what big corporations are like, and what mangers are like ... saving money

The HX suppression mod is a bit of a hack which abuses one of the batch flags. It is not a really awful hack but I think we should be able to do better. I'm not sure what exactly HI type behaviour is.

After thought, and considering the HX suppression mod posted by Dave, and that intercepting HX would allow BREXX to have HI type behaviour, and that if a divide by zero requires a IPL you can

Thank you everyone - to close this subject this is the code I am going to use. I don't use this approach too often but I thought folks might be interested in seeing a non-standard GCC meld of C and

Source files

Well the results are in - apologies for the long email and not formatting into table - but you know how it is! I declaring *Peter the WINNER* for providing the?MVCL code (although it was suggested by

My take on this: a long poll wait time is not that bad, important is that the exec can stop without me forcing off the user a short poll time is wasteful, and we are not in the business of using HX

Indeed, I abhor polling - but isn't that how CMS itself does HX? I too can poll on an I/O interrupt ... Is the challenge that the flag does not exist - or the worry about polling?

dave, i didnt mean that CP would abend. i meant that the PIC would be thrown by CP. Sorry for the confusion. Joe

Adrian, I think that would be a challenge and you would either waste lot of time polling the flag, or risk running for a long time before detecting it. I must say CMS is by design, single threaded,

Thanks Dave Great find however. Would this work: Could I use the HX suppression mod to stop HX. But them within GCCLIB poll the HX flag myself (is there a flag?) and if set, exit gracefully. By the

I think I am very confused :-) What I will do is - Make sure the GCCLIB internals is worked wrt signals (fake signals if you like) - Do a PoC with SPIE?etc. and see what happens with closing files,