> The Standard permits the stem.0 convention, therefore implicitly> requiring > its support.
Even without that it explicitly allows the use of numeric tails. > Regrettably, too many journeyman Rexx programmers misbelieve > that it's the *only* permitted use of compounds. ObSchiller Say it isn't so, Joe! Alas, I believe it. I don't recall other places where the standard uses the stem.0 convention, but I wouldn't be surprised if it pops up elsewhere. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [[email protected]] on behalf of Paul Gilmartin [[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, February 2, 2021 2:29 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Rexx stem variable question On Tue, 2 Feb 2021 18:54:42 +0000, Seymour J Metz wrote: >The ANSI standard for REXX describes the use of the stem.0 convention, e.g., >in conjunction with ADDRESS ... WITH. > The Standard permits the stem.0 convention, therefore implicitly requiring its support. Regrettably, too many journeyman Rexx programmers misbelieve that it's the *only* permitted use of compounds. I should have said that widely presumed restriction is contrary to the Standard. Does the Standard refer to the stem.0 convention anywhere except in conjunction with ADDRESS ... WITH? -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
