In <23326c108987498c818a941ac4a05...@ericnbpc>, on 11/19/2010
at 09:00 PM, Eric Bielefeld <[email protected]> said:
>I've always liked ISPF edit much more than XEDIT. You said PDF edit
>- I'm not sure if you mean something different than ISPF edit.
There was a time when IBM split SPF into two products; ISPF and
ISPF/PDF. This was when they renamed it from Interactive Structured
Programing Facility to Interactive System Productivity Facility. EDIT
was in the PDF component of Interactive Structured Programing Facility
but it was all one product.
>My theory is that what you learn to use first is usually what you
>like best.
026? You can have it. ATS? Ditto.
>I first learned SPF edit back around 1979. I was the VM systems
>programmer for 5 or 6 years, but I never liked XEDIT as well.
I generally preferred XEDIT but I missed having two kinds of shift.
But I'm a tool-building guy and XEDIT had better facilities for
building edit macros than ISPF/PDF EDIT has.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
