I really like REXX, but I gotta agree about the math. Had to write a SQRT function for myself, once, though I don't recall now why I needed it. If I had to write really serious programs, I suppose I'd have to go back to PL/1, which I still think is one of the best I ever learned. Or maybe it's just because it was my first :). For some values of "serious"; I'm lazy enough to prefer interpreted languages.
I'll switch in a minute, though, if there ever appears a widely available interpreter for an object-oriented language. Here I sit back, confidently expecting a raft of nominations, but please note I said "interpreter" and "widely available". I'd define VBScript as "widely available" on the PC, not because everyone uses it but because it'll run on any Windows machine - no special installation required. Is there any OO language like that in z/OS? --- Bob Bridges, [email protected], cell 336 382-7313 /* When I face an issue of great import that cleaves both constituents and colleagues, I always take the same approach. I engage in deep deliberation and quiet contemplation. I wait to the last available minute and then I always vote with the losers. Because, my friend, the winners never remember and the losers never forget. -Sen. Everett Dirksen */ -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Seymour J Metz Sent: Monday, March 30, 2020 11:23 I'm a REXX advocate, but it is a terrible language for Mathematics. The lack of arrays is enough to take it off the table. C has a similar problem; it has arrays, but the are one dimensional, and array of pointers are not suitable alternatives to multi-dimensional arrays; try writing an efficient transpose routine. I haven't looked at the STL to see how C++ stacks up in that regard. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
