Not wild about any of the suggestions so far.  The @ implies that what follows 
is the location of something, not the thing itself.  Do we really need to be 
concerned about variables in Classic Rexx on platforms that don't run ooRexx in 
the first place?
-------- Original message --------From: Mike Cowlishaw <> 
Date: 4/12/18  21:58  (GMT-05:00) To: 'Open Object Rexx Developer Mailing List' 
<> Subject: Re: [Oorexx-devel] Discussion: 
Adding variable references to ooRexx. 

Yes, I wasn't keen on arrows or '^' either 

    But I'm even more un-keen on 
    '&'.  <<shudder>>
    How about '*', then, as being still 
    being one of the two ends of the C 

  I’m even less keen on using *. Now that C++ allows you to declare 
  arguments as being references rather than pointers, I've been moving away 
  using pointers as arguments.  
   A resemblance to exec2 is not 
  that strong of an argument when you consider a large portion of the ooRexx 
  users have never even heard of the language.   
That really isn't true .. almost all ooRexx users are Rexx users, 
mostly ex- (or current) mainframers.

  it's not like every variable is going to suddenly acquiring a leading '&'. 
  This will generally be used in a few selective place, such as situations 
  you wish to return multiple values back from a call or method.  
However or wherever it is used it would 
be inexplicable, and if it is used only rarely then it would be even more 
baffling when it appears.  What does the 'and' operator have to do with 
This would be a classic example of 
a bewildering notation that makes a language inscrutable.  When seen, 
users would be forced to open the manual to figure out what it 
does.   In short: maybe a nice addition to Perl, but it has no 
place in a Rexx language.
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites,!
Oorexx-devel mailing list

Reply via email to