On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 09:31:45 -0500, Eric Chevalier wrote: > >But note: later in that same message thread, Alan Ackerman posted a >follow-up message from Ken Tomiak stating: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg17992.html > > IBM did some internal discussing, and we are proud to announce IBM > will continue to take Rexx requirements from SHARE for the > interpreter. That's right, only the Compiler is in maintenance > mode. > >So it looks like REXX is not completely dead after all! > Does this imply that the specifications of interpreted Rexx and compiled Rexx are apt to diverge? Ugh!
(Or is the syntax governed by a shared code base?) -- 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
