Since Rexx accepts either the not sign or \ as an alternate not sign, and since the \ was foisted off on us a long time ago because of errors in sending files with the "real" not sign, I have become accustomed to seeing "\" and thinking "not". It is no different than accepting "^" as a not sign, and similar to accepting "don't" or "dont" as meaning "do not". I am surprised you haven't seen the conversation before.
I am not trying to force other people to conform to what seems natural to me. I merely pointed out that each has his/her own idea of what is natural. What seems natural to you may not seem so to others. I had been programming 22 years before I ran across "\" as an alternate not sign and did not see the "<>" notation for several years after that. Is it any wonder that I do not see that "ugly" expression as natural? :-) Regards, Richard Schuh > -----Original Message----- > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of RPN01 > Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 9:00 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Some REXX help > > To me, \= is not "not equal" at all; This conversation was > the first time I'd ever seen that notation. The not sign is > specific, but doesn't exist on some character sets. The only > consistent one would be <>, at least in my experience. > -- > Bob Nix > > > On 10/21/08 10:56 AM, "Schuh, Richard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Maybe more readable to some but not to others. If you take > the symbols > > at face value, \=, not equal to, is more readable than <>, > is less than > > or greater than. I guess it depends on whether you first > encountered the > > notion in mathematics or programming. To me, the not equal > too is more > > natural. > > > > Regards, > > Richard Schuh > > > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: The IBM z/VM Operating System > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of RPN01 > >> Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 6:48 AM > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: Some REXX help > >> > >> You can also make it a bit more readable, and less character > >> set dependent, by replacing the \= with <>. > >> > >> -- > >> Robert P. Nix Mayo Foundation .~. > >> RO-OE-5-55 200 First Street SW /V\ > >> 507-284-0844 Rochester, MN 55905 /( )\ > >> ----- ^^-^^ > >> "In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in > >> practice, theory and practice are different." > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On 10/20/08 11:11 PM, "Alan Ackerman" > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>> On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:06:48 -0700, Schuh, Richard > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> wrot > >>> e: > >>> > >>>> Ah, but the semicolon makes it two Rexx statements. The same as > >>>> > >>>> If rest¬sym; > >>>> ='' then call ... > >>>> > >>>> Your syntax will be better if you remove the ; > >>>> > >>>> Regards, > >>>> Richard Schuh > >>> > >>> Standard HTML entities like > and < start with an & (am > >>> persand) and end with a ; (semicolon). > >>> The whole string ¬sym; was supposed to be a NOT SIGN. > >> True, if you > >>> typed that into REXX, it would think the ; was a statement > >> separator. > >>> But you don't want to remove the semicolon, you want to > >> map ¬sym; > >>> to / (slash) or \ (backslash) or not-sign. REXX does not require a > >>> not-sign > >>> -- I recommend using backslash. > >>> > >>> Alan Ackerman > >>> Alan (dot) Ackerman (at) Bank of America (dot) com > >> >
