Once again you are lying about what others think.
-- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [[email protected]] on behalf of David Crayford [[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2021 3:44 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: ISPF for mainframe Linux To summarize: 1. You don't think it's necessary to have editor features like code completion, refactoring, hover-help, syntax highlighting or static code analysis. 2. Writing macros is an absolute must even if the editor that you use provides commands and key mappings so there is no requirement to write macros. 3. Modern editors and/or the back-end/protocols that they use are stupid and we should all just stick to Tritus-SPF. 4. If anybody disagrees with any of the above then they are talking nonsense and nobody on this newsgroup agrees with them? Is that about right? Please don't bother replying. You always seem to want to have to last word I am so incredibly bored by it all now. As I suspect everybody else is. On 31/01/2021 3:55 pm, Seymour J Metz wrote: > Whoosh! A syntax direct editor is a frequent component of an IDE > > What seems to you is, as usual, wrong. Meanwhile, you are hypocritically > doing exactly what you accuse me of and not even trying to understand what I > and others have written. > > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > > ________________________________________ > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [[email protected]] on behalf of > David Crayford [[email protected]] > Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2021 2:25 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: ISPF for mainframe Linux > > On 31/01/2021 10:49 am, Seymour J Metz wrote: >> Did it ever occur to you that when you write things that people know to be >> false, they're less likely to believe what you write about other matters? > > Shrug! I could care less what you think. You're understanding of > mainframe technology seems to be chained to the past. Hence why you take > so many endless trips down memory lane. > > >> BTW, syntax directed editors have been around longer than three decades, >> regardless of when you first discovered them. > > I don't remember mentioning syntax directed editors? I was talking about > LSP and using a client/server architecture to decouple the editor from > language specific features like > context assist, hover over, auto-completion and advanced static code > analyzers. Any editor that is an LSP client can uses IBM's free COBOL, > PL/1, HLASM language servers. And that is pretty much > every popular editor including Vim (neovim). Zowe has mainframe specific > editors that use LSP. There are also many commercial products coming > online from mainframe vendors that > use LSP. It seems to me that you don't even bother trying to understand > what I'm talking about. You just hit reply and start typing lots of > pompous, ignorant drivel. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
