Thanks, Rick.  And FWIW (not all that much, I admit) I fully agree with option 1.  -Chip-

On 10/23/2024 4:26 PM, Rick McGuire wrote:
The only use for labels inside those constructs is that they would show up if Trace L is in effect. Otherwise, they are useless. So the question comes down to 1) disallow them if they appear in a location where they can't be branched to, or 2) allow them, but catch all attempts to branch to one in a bad location. From my standpoint, catching them at translation time and raising an error is much better than the disruption that would be caused to rework the internals to raise an error at run time. And the nice thing about raising an error up front is that it is always easier to lift a restriction later than try to impose one after the fact.

Rick

On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 4:19 PM Chip Davis <c...@aresti.com> wrote:

    For my benefit (I am not the language-design mavens some of you
    are) would someone give me a code example where using a label
    inside a block instruction was useful, necessary, or even
    reasonable.  Aside from violating many fundamentals of the Rexx
    Philosophy, I can't understand what algorithmic problem would be
    solved by allowing such labels.

    -Chip-


    On 10/23/2024 9:31 AM, Josep Maria Blasco wrote:
    Hi all,

    There are some ongoing changes to the ooRexx interpreter that
    will strongly affect the language definition, in such a way
    that the 5.1.0 release may end up implementing a version of the
    language that does no longer allow us to hold true what is
    asserted in the landing page for the project:

        "Home of the Open Object Rexx Project. ooRexx is the open
        source version of IBM's Object REXX Interpreter. *It is
        upwardly compatible with classic REXX and will execute
        classic REXX programs unchanged*. The project is managed by
        the Rexx Language Association".


    In the preceding paragraph, I have highlighted the part that
    will become problematic if the ongoing changes consolidate. Namely,

      * Any program containing labels inside block instructions
        will immediately stop working (with syntax error 47.002 for
        DO/LOOP, 47.003 for IF, and 47.004 for SELECT).
      * Any program containing labels before the initial EXPOSE or
        USE LOCAL method instructions will fail (with 99.910 for
        USE LOCAL and 99.907 for EXPOSE).

    Please note that _these programs will stop working even if they
    never branch_ (i.e., SIGNAL or CALL) _to any of these labels_.
    Normal ("classic Rexx") semantics for such labels is to treat
    them as null clauses, except for tracing purposes: when TRACE
    Labels is in effect, the language processor

        Traces [...] labels passed during program execution. This
        is especially useful with debug mode, when the language
        processor pauses after each invocation or call (rexxref
        2.29.1).


    If the ongoing changes consolidate into the 5.1.0 release, our
    claim of compatibility with classic Rexx will no longer be valid.

    My impression is that these changes should be reverted, but I
    understand that there has been a considerable amount of effort
    put by the developers in implementing these modifications, and
    therefore such a reversal should not be undertaken slightly.

    Please allow me to elaborate on the background behind these
    changes, to widen our perspective about the subject.

    *Statement of the problem*

    A label is a clause. Following TRL2 (and TRL1, in that
    respect), "more than one label may precede /any instruction/"
    (emphasis mine). Some interpreters seem to allow labels
    preceding /any clause/. To appreciate the difference between
    the two concepts, please consider the following small program:

        Trace L
        A: If 1 = 1
        B: Then
        C: Say "Hi"


    Object Rexx (6.00, ArcaOS) chokes on B:, but allows A: and C:
    (THEN is not an instruction by itself); Regina Rexx happily
    processes A:, B: and C: (and traces them, when asked); the
    current version of ooRexx refuses to run the above program,
    even if we eliminate the B: label (it produces a 47.3, 'Labels
    are not allowed within an IF block; found "C"').

    The ANSI standard defines labels inside a block instruction as
    "trace-only", and reserves errors 16.2 and 16.3 for the cases
    when a CALL or SIGNAL instruction tries to target one of these
    labels.

    The Errata for the Rexx standard explicitly corrects 6.3.2.14
    and 6.3.2.19, stating "This disallows labels before the THEN
    keyword".

    Now the question is the following:
    *
    *
    *¿What variant of the language should ooRexx implement?*

    There was some discussion in the developers list (starting at
    https://sourceforge.net/p/oorexx/mailman/message/58813104/)
    about whether labels inside block instructions should be
    allowed to be called/branched to. The consensus was that this
    should not be allowed, putting ooRexx in line with the ANSI
    standard in this respect. I agree with that.

    There was also a discussion about whether labels should be
    allowed when/ they cannot be branched to/. The example used was
    relatively ambiguous, since it used a label before a THEN keyword:

        label: THEN


    ¿Why do I say that this is an ambiguous example? Because one
    might object to disallowing such a label, a) because THEN is
    not an instruction, or b) because THEN is part of an IF.
    Depending on how we understand the example, we will have two
    different versions of the language.

    *The main point is this*

    One may have good reasons to want to disallow labels before
    THEN and, at the same time, think that /instructions/ inside
    other instructions (i.e., /not/ clauses which are not
    instructions by themselves) deserve to have labels, even if
    they are, as the ANSI standard says, trace-only.

    *My take is the following*

    Labels before THEN, ELSE, WHEN, OTHERWISE or END should not be
    allowed. All other labels should be allowed, including before
    EXPOSE and USE LOCAL. SIGNALing or CALLing a label before
    EXPOSE or USE LOCAL, or a label inside an IF/DO/LOOP/SELECT
    should produce an error.

    *What do you all think?*

    This is important. We are about to change the definition of the
    language, making it potentially incompatible with many existing
    programs.

    Kind regards,

      Josep Maria





    _______________________________________________
    Oorexx-devel mailing list
    Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
    https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel

    _______________________________________________
    Oorexx-devel mailing list
    Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
    https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel



_______________________________________________
Oorexx-devel mailing list
Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel

_______________________________________________
Oorexx-devel mailing list
Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel

Reply via email to