From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,LOTS_OF_MONEY autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fdb77,e782a79d4e27e773 X-Google-Attributes: gidfdb77,public X-Google-Thread: 10a146,e782a79d4e27e773 X-Google-Attributes: gid10a146,public X-Google-Thread: 101deb,e782a79d4e27e773 X-Google-Attributes: gid101deb,public X-Google-Thread: 1073c2,e782a79d4e27e773 X-Google-Attributes: gid1073c2,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,e782a79d4e27e773 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-06-29 05:23:49 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!sjc-peer.news.verio.net!news.verio.net!iad-read.news.verio.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.pl1,comp.lang.vrml,comp.lang.java.advocacy References: From: "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" Subject: Re: S/3xx (was Market pressures for more reliable software) Mail-Copies-To: nobody Organization: Atid/2 X-Cise: "Tony Schliesser" X-CompuServe-Customer: Yes X-Coriate: NCAE@NewAmerica.org X-Ecrate: Bob Germer X-Punge: Micro$oft X-Sanguinate: themvsguy@email.com X-Terminate: SPA(GIS) Message-ID: <3b3c6f94$5$fuzhry$mr2ice@va.news.verio.net> X-Newsreader: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for OS/2 v2.28a/28 Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 08:07:48 -0400 NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.55.10.86 X-Complaints-To: abuse@verio.net X-Trace: iad-read.news.verio.net 993817427 206.55.10.86 (Fri, 29 Jun 2001 12:23:47 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 12:23:47 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:9246 comp.lang.java.programmer:79579 comp.lang.pl1:1171 comp.lang.vrml:3954 comp.lang.java.advocacy:22261 Date: 2001-06-29T08:07:48-04:00 List-Id: In , on 06/28/2001 at 02:14 PM, robin said: >I'm not confusing anything. You were and you still are. If you conult Princciples of Operation you will note that it never refers to the displacement as an address, but instead talks about how the processor *generates* an address from the displacement. >Relocatable addresses are not "adjusted by the loader". This is done >automatically via the base register(s). When did you drop out of the communist party? What? You claim you never belonged? Well, I never said that the loader adjusts displacements. As to relocatoable addresses, see p. 98 of SY28-6659-7, which states "Changes the values of address constants in the loaded program from relative addresses to absolute addresses." >When an address constant [A(xxx)] is specified, the loader has to >supply the relevant actual address. The assembler can only provide >a relative address. When I specify an address constant of A(16), what action does the loader need to take to adjust it? The assembler documentation clearly spells out the difference between relocatable and nonrelocatable values. -- ----------------------------------------------------------- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT Atid/2 Team OS/2 Team PL/I Any unsolicited commercial junk E-mail will be subject to legal action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. I mangled my E-mail address to foil automated spammers; reply to domain acm dot org user shmuel to contact me. Do not reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org -----------------------------------------------------------