Hi

one question that I have for the knowledgeable folks here.? I gathered, by lurking, that there has been a number of different assemblers in MVS and z/OS (and, I presume, VM, and possibly MTS and MUSIC/SP).? I have read about IFOX, ASSIST, etc etc

Is there a link anywhere with a timeline of these tools?? Or maybe somebody here would care to comment?
I am particularly interested in understanding what is currently available on MVS 3.8j/TK4- and z/OS.

Thanks

--
Marco Antoniotti
Somewhere over the rainbow

Yep.

It's be nice to have a table with

??? Assembler name, IBM native Y/N, Year released, Program name, AKA/Nicknames/Aliases, Features

With "Features" obviously being a kitchen sink.

All the best

--
Marco Antoniotti
Somewhere over the rainbow

Thank you Rupert.? Following from the link you posted you get to

which contains more information.


--
Marco Antoniotti
Somewhere over the rainbow

开云体育

These days there is also SATK with its ASMA assembler, written in
Python and runs anywhere Python does.



Harold Grovesteen

Harold Grovesteen wrote:

These days there is also SATK with its ASMA assembler,
written in Python and runs anywhere Python does.

Highly recommended!

--
"Fish" (David B. Trout)
Software Development Laboratories

mail: fish@...

Hi Harold

yes, thanks.? I do follow the groups.io forum about SATK, although I have not played with it.

From the examples I gather that ASMA/SATK does not have a syntax that is different from the other IBM assemblers (apart from the "high level" features of HLASM), is that correct?

Essentially,

NAME OPERATION OPERANDS REMARKS

with NAME being 8 character long and spaces meaningful (Cfr., "High Level Assembler for z/OS & z/VM & z/VSE - Language Reference - Version 1 Release 6").

At least that is what I gathered.

All the best

Marco




--
Marco Antoniotti
Somewhere over the rainbow

Evidently, Assembler F was written by 3 or 4 people. ?Some comments in the source code state something like “call
Joe’s parser”, “call Frank’s routine”, etc.

I knew the author of Assembler G, Rene Peterson, when I worked at the University of Waterloo.

Not only was Assembler G way faster that Assembler F, ?it had a squished cross reference listing feature. ?That feature alone probably saved thousands of trees!
--
Regards,
Bernie (did 360 assembler programming on IBM Model 75 in late 1960s)

On Sun, 6 Dec 2020, at 17:43, Ham Radio wrote:

[Edited Message Follows]

Why do I (and presumably other people too) get two copies of some
messages, the latter one always seemingly starting with that [text]?

--
Jeremy Nicoll - my opinions are my own.

The CIA/NSA. When they get a copy of every IP message going through a
few ISP hubs, sometimes the second message gets back onto the
internet. I have one particular web site that keeps track of which
forum posts you have been sent. About 80% of the time it sends the
page a second time with all the unread flags turned off, with about a
2-3 second delay. Worse is the first page of display, because it
starts at the first unread post then the second page goes to the next
page so I have to go back to the previous page of 10 posts then go
forward. Other times I start reading a page and it refreshes after a
few seconds.

--
Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA
Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all?

That is a result of using the edit feature. ?I try to use it minimally but if I enter something truly incorrect, ?I make a edit. If you click on the Edited button on the far right of the message, you will see the before and after changes made by the edit.?
--
Regards,
Bernie (did 360 assembler programming on IBM Model 75 in late 1960s)

On Sun, 6 Dec 2020, at 20:29, Ham Radio wrote:

That is a result of using the edit feature. I try to use it minimally
but if I enter something truly incorrect, I make a edit. If you click
on the Edited button on the far right of the message, you will see the
before and after changes made by the edit.

There's no button.... because I read the traffic by email. Worse, when
a (slightly different, I suppose) message arrives, there's nothing in its
text that shows what was changed.

--
Jeremy Nicoll - my opinions are my own.

On Sun, Dec 06, 2020 at 08:51:36PM +0000, Jeremy Nicoll wrote:

There's no button.... because I read the traffic by email. Worse, when
a (slightly different, I suppose) message arrives, there's nothing in its
text that shows what was changed.

I follow the list via e-mail also. I'm inclined to treat edited messages
much like I treat broken threads. I rarely follow broken threads. If I've
already read an original message, I'm not going to reread an edited message
and try to figure what's been changed.





--

Kevin



Bruceville, TX

What's the definition of a legacy system? One that works!
Errare humanum est, ignoscere caninum.

Kevin

I am in full agreement. However, if I make a serious mistake in a message i.e. Assembler F versus Assembler G, I submit a correction. ?For a typo it really does not matter.

The owner of groups.io may be interested in your concern that a second edited message should perhaps be marked “edited”. Contact him with your feature request.
--
Regards,
Bernie (did 360 assembler programming on IBM Model 75 in late 1960s)

Kevin Monceaux wrote:

I follow the list via e-mail also. I'm inclined to treat
edited messages much like I treat broken threads. I rarely
follow broken threads. If I've already read an original
message, I'm not going to reread an edited message and try
to figure what's been changed.

I hear you, Kevin. HOWEVER...

As for me, I do just the opposite:

When I receive an email marked "[Edited Message Follows]", I *delete* the original message and keep *ONLY* the new ("edited") message.

Doing so ensures my replies (should I wish to reply to what the author said) pertains to what the original author actually intended to say. It ensures only *accurate* information is retained and only *inaccurate* information is discarded.

Threading is not really an issue for me. Outlook considers subsequent edited messages that might be received as part of the same thread anyway, and, like you, I don't use the groups.io web interface anyway, so threading issues are really a non-issue for me.

But IMO it's important to NOT disregard/delete the author's edited message. IMO it's better to do as I do, and simply delete the *original* email instead, and keep *only* the subsequent "edited" message.

Just my 2 cents. <shrug>

--
"Fish" (David B. Trout)
Software Development Laboratories

mail: fish@...