On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 11:14:30 -0700, Charles Mills wrote: > >You're right: it would arguably be harder to write code that accepted NO, >No, and no but not nO. > Not necessarily; the programmer could easily have coded 3 switch/case/SELECT labels for the branches considered plausible. Easier to code than to document.
C has the standard library function strcasecmp(). Does COBOL or PL/I provide similar. HLASM? For all I know it might be one of the new z/EC12 instructions. >-----Original Message----- >From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On >Behalf Of John Gilmore >Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 11:05 AM > >I disagree. If 'NO', 'No', and 'no' are acceptable, 'nO' should be too. >The obvious ways to make the first three interchangeable---using one of the >HLASM macro-language LOWER or UPPER BIFs or the like---would indeed make >'nO' admissible too. ... > Are those not merely macro-language BIFs, but can they generate code to perform the translation at runtime? -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
