In a recent note, "Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)" said:
> Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 16:58:32 -0300
>
> De gustibus non disputandem est. I find REXX easies to use for simple
^^^^^^^^^^^
disputandUm?
> applications, use Perl for more complicated cases and would be most
> uncharitable to anyone who tried to convince me to use the POSIX
> shell. Of course, a tool like ISPF File Tailoring makes it easier
> regardless of the language used.
>
I don't believe Rexx can compete with a shell script containing
a here-document containing substitutable symbols. I've regularly
taken existing JCL and wrapped it with:
{ cat <<end-of-JCL
...
end-of-JCL
} | submit
... put '$' before selected names to make them variables,
and run it.
The deficiency of Rexx here is that it has no facility for
instream data.
> >I haven't tried assembler, but it intrigues me. Does
> >the "AREAD ... PUNCH" sequence perform symbol substitution,
> >presumably of GBLC variables?
>
> No, but you can parse the input and request substitution.
>
I hereby retract any enthusiasm I may have mistakenly expressed
for the assembler option.
As for the ordering of processing of PUNCH statements, questioned
elsewhere in this thread:
Title: HLASM V1R4 Language Reference
Document Number: SC26-4940-03
5.37 PUNCH Instruction
The assembler writes the record produced by a PUNCH
statement when it writes the object deck. The
ordering of this record in the object deck is
determined by the order in which the PUNCH
statement is processed by the assembler. The record
appears after any object deck records produced by
previous statements, and before any other object
deck records produced by subsequent statements.
-- gil
--
StorageTek
INFORMATION made POWERFUL
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
