CLIST will never go away, but I avoid it as much as possible. There is a very limited set of use cases for it, IMHO, and REXX has been my goto scripting language for decades, with a grudging nod to Perl when CPAN can make my life easier.
PowerShell suggests that you're not limited to Z, inwhich case it's worth looking at ooRexx. Have you looked at Ruby? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל חַי נֵ֣צַח יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל לֹ֥א יְשַׁקֵּ֖ר ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on behalf of Bob Bridges <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, March 15, 2024 7:58 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Rexx numeric digits and scientific notation question I can tell you how it happened to me, at any rate. I was a long-time CLISTer, and then one day, back in the mid '80s it might have been, I ran across a warning from IBM that someday soon CLIST might go away and REXX would be the only supported language for system automation (or something like that). I took them seriously - I didn't know at the time that they used to issue that warning periodically - and sat down with a manual to start learning REXX. I quickly realized that it's ~much~ superior to CLIST, and have been an enthusiast ever since. But that needn't stop me from tacking on other languages; I'm not tired of that yet, and I still have ambitions of adding more. Python is better, you say? But can I use it in the TSO environment? If it's only for Unix, I may pass for now. I still work for multiple clients and it seems to me I could usefully focus on languages that the clients are likely to use themselves. That means TSO REXX, VBA and VBS, SQL, assembler, probably PowerShell, maybe PL/1... What else? Seriously I'm open to the next one I should tackle. I keep hearing about Python, Lua, Ruby, C++ and others, but in what environment(s) would I use them? --- Bob Bridges, [email protected], cell 336 382-7313 /* Sometimes you feel like a nut. After a day of working on a walnut farm, you don't. -Mike Rowe of the TV show "Dirty Jobs" */ -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On Behalf Of David Crayford Sent: Friday, March 15, 2024 18:41 REXX can indeed be quite tricky to navigate. I recently conducted a session titled "Python for REXX programmers" at work, and during the preparation, I was surprised (although not entirely) by the numerous traps and pitfalls inherent in REXX. When you add to this its absence of basic functionalities like sorting lists, it begs the question: Why opt for REXX when we have a plethora of alternatives available today? The obvious answer may be familiarity, but in our industry, this argument seems rather weak unless you're confined to a limited environment. After all, I wouldn't want to revert to using a 1990s-era flip-top phone, let alone a rotary dial from the 1970s. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
