RE: Strange behavior w/%editc()

["Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: bmorris@ca.ibm.com
>

(much snipping, just to get a couple of points)

> Joe, no functionality has been removed.  You can still use MOVE.
>
> My problem with MOVE is that it is too powerful.
>
> Imagine maintaining code where someone made use of the more
> arcane features of MOVE, such as multiplication by 10, or changing
> the sign to positive.  Yikes.  Such code does exist.
>
> But I admit that MOVE, MOVEL and MOVEA were omitted deliberately.

Okay, this at least I can get my brain around.  And whether or not I agree,
I can understand that it was a reasoned decision.  And I can relate to the
concept that MOVE can be abused (hey, look what pain and suffering MULT
100.0001 caused).

I also like the thought that you folks are open to change, although I can
see it would take a massive groundswell for you to see your way to including
the full-blown move.  I'd like to give you a sound, reasoned reply, but
right now I'm debugging an issue that, ironically enough, is partially
because of a bad MOVE instruction.

The gods, they have humor, but we understand it not.

Joe