====== Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) ====== wrote 2006-08-18 22:27:
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 08/18/2006
at 03:43 PM, Thomas Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Yes, but at least regarding REXX I haven't found any mentionable
"wartifications". Do You think of any specific points ?
Quite a few. See my "Safe REXX" article. Off the top of my head:
The lack of support for the TSO stack comparable to what CLIST[1]
provides.
Right. This is one shortcomings of REXX I don't understand.
How could they even THINK of leaving out that functionality ??
(As it exists in CLIST right before their nose!)
The lack of support for parsing.
You mean as in regular expressions ?
The fact that the syntax is close enough to PL/I[2] to mislead
people into coding as if it were PL/I when the semantics are
very different.
This one I don't flow my tears for. ;)
(As I have never coded in PL/I etc.)
The lack of call by reference. That's fixed in OREXX, but I'm not
aware of a CMS or TSO port.
Right.
The lack of true block structure.
Right. (BTW, do You mean as in "data structures" or "code structure" ?
As regarding data structures I think we are talking about a quite different
programming language; which would also need (or rather it would be a strong
request for)
strong typing etc.)
[1] But I still prefer REXX to CLIST.
By miles... err... lightyears !
[2] I have the same issue with SAS.
--
__________________________
Mundus Vult Decipi
__________________________
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety.
- Benjamin Franklin
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
