> On 22 May 2024, at 10:32, Josep Maria Blasco <jose.maria.bla...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> I like it. As it always happens, though, the devil is in the details. Take
> your own example, and assume that we have implemented TRACE as you describe
> it, and that you have removed the display of ">I>". Your code would now
> amount to
>
> ::method myMethod
> use strict arg <some arguments>, trace=.false
> if trace then trace i
>
> and then the TRACE instruction would be the THEN branch of an IF that
> followed a USE instruction, and therefore it would not activate the
> retro-trace (not the first instruction, nor the second after an EXPOSE).
Good point.
I could use something like that, assuming the trace argument is the 4th:
trace value (arg(4) == .true)~?("i", "o”)
_______________________________________________
Oorexx-devel mailing list
Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
