From: alex@nospicedham.rivadpm.com   
      
   On 30-Dec-18 19:53, R.Wieser wrote:   
   > Alex,   
   >   
   >> Because all the string & other = type constants have to be addressable, it   
   >> normally needs the CSECT in which they were referenced to have an   
   >> appropriate and addressable LTORG section.   
   >   
   > He wrote he adopted the syntax.   He never said he implemented it the same   
   > way.   
      
   Yes, I understand that. It is a very neat idea. I was pointing out the   
   limitations in the original implementation. It wasn't relevant here, I   
   agree.   
      
   >   
   >> That is considered "Bad Practice" for messages. It makes translating code   
   >> for other languages hard.   
   >   
   > :-)  That did not stop IBM from creating their own specific solution to the   
   > problem, now did it ?   
      
   No, it didn't, but there are many features in many languages &   
   assemblers that are there for considered use and when appropriate; and I   
   don't think the use proposed is considered or appropriate. I still   
   consider this:   
      
   > I believe that the most convenient way is not having to invent a   
   > unique symbol name for each string, but use the string value itself,   
   > just in place where it is needed.   
      
   not to be good advice. YMMV etc.   
      
   --   
   Alex   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)