Nice irony how he not only misunderstood the statement, but introduced his own typo/spelling error.
It pays to read before write... sas On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 8:45 AM, J R <[email protected]> wrote: > The point made was that the paragraph did not make sense as printed. The > suggestion was *not* that LSR and RLS were equivalent. > > > On Jun 4, 2018, at 08:26, Allan Staller <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > "(I'm assuming that last usage of "RLS" > should be "LSR".)" > > > > No. RLS and LST are *VERY* different. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- sas ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
