On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 05:10:22 -0500, Jan MOEYERSONS wrote:
>On Mon, 6 Sep 2010 11:28:57 -0500, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>
>>>Used longer-than-80 a few times for entering shell script as in-stream data.
>>>
>>Why should Kirk be much concerned with supporting the Unix lunatic fringe?
>
>I don't know.
>
>I only wanted to state the fact that I sometimes need to kick off a shell
>script
>in batch and that the text of the script sometimes has lines longer than 80
>characters.
>
That was irony. I know that Kirk has a strong interest in Unix, as do I.
BTW, a last resort method for continuing a statement in a shell script
is to introduce an empty command substitution:
echo 'foo'$(
)'bar'
But, yes, I'd prefer to have longer lines available.
And for Ted's remark concerning ISPF SUBMIT vs. TSO, that's a detail
of implementation that the user wanting an enhancement shouldn't need
to be concerned with.
-- gil
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
