On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 20:08:12 +0100, Martin Packer wrote: > >SAVE has, to my mind, been most invaluable. Prior to this you had to >figure out the boolean complement of the INCLUDE= clause. With more than >one INCLUDE= clause in a sort it became hairier, requiring De Morgan's >Law*. :-) SAVE made this a lot simpler and less error prone. > Yet adding a NOT operator to the grammar (no one has mentioned that there is one) would relieve programmers of the chore of rewriting complex Boolean expressions with De Morgan's Law.
>"Card Dealer" not so much. > I don't know "Card Dealer". Does that amount to having multiple OUTFILs using different tags? Thanks, gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
