On Wed, 7 Oct 2020, at 14:49, Paul Gilmartin wrote: > On Wed, 7 Oct 2020 13:45:04 +0100, Jeremy Nicoll wrote: > > ... > >Alternatively, maybe you never wrote any edit macros in anything other > >than REXX? ISTR that one could use any SAA language, eg COBOL or > >Assembler, apart from CLIST/REXX. > > > If so, I'd expect the limiting factor to be Edit's parsing the command string.
But only if the macro made intelligent use of editor commands, for example issuing change commands to affect all matching lines in a file. If it instead iterated through the file a line at a time, looking for things and maybe replacing whole lines itself then much more of the cpu use could be down to the macro's own logic. That's the point. The OP's contention that a macro was much less efficient depends a great deal on what the macro was doing and how it was written. -- Jeremy Nicoll - my opinions are my own. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
