I have no opinion on whether this would be a good thing or not, but if it
was considered a good thing, then I think there should also be a way
provided to load the Options from a file (created by saving a properties
class) instead of a string you have to type on the command line.

hope that is helpful

Jon

On Mon, 29 Sept 2025 at 13:55, Josep Maria Blasco <
[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> Missatge de Rony G. Flatscher <[email protected]> del dia dl., 29
> de set. 2025 a les 14:03:
>
>> One more idea: as ooRexx starts out with predefined options values (like
>> "digits 9", "trace normal", ...) which currently can be changed statically
>> per program/package by adding ::options statements, it should be possible
>> to define those "predefined options" at startup. E.g., something like
>> (borrowing from Regina)
>>
>>    - rexx someRexxProgram -o "options string" somePgm args ... somePgm
>>    and each program executed will get its options changed to "options string"
>>    - rexx someRexxProgram --options="options string" somePgm
>>    args ... somePgm and each program executed will get its options changed to
>>    "options string"
>>    - rexx someRexxProgram -op somePgmWithOptionsSet.cls somePgm
>>    args ... somePgm and each program executed will get its options changed to
>>    all ::OPTIONS in "somePgmWithOptionsSet.cls"
>>
>> or an environment variable like OOREXX_OPTIONS, where each program
>> executed will get its options changed to OOREXX_OPTIONS.
>>
>> This would allow Walter's requirement to be easily applied without the
>> need to change any program, something like 'rexx -o "ALL SYNTAX" somePgm
>> [args]'
>>
> +1
>
>   Josep Maria
>
>
>> ---rony
>>
>>
>> On 28.09.2025 21:46, Rony G. Flatscher wrote:
>>
>> On 28.09.2025 15:04, Hobart Spitz wrote:
>>
>>
>> IMHO, yes.  It keeps with the philosophy of general flexibility and
>> "letting the programmer do what they want when they want" even if we can't
>> think of a reason right now.
>>
>> Thank you for your feedback, Hobart!
>>
>> Any other thoughts?
>>
>> ---rony
>>
>>
>> OREXXMan
>> Q: What do you call the residence of the ungulate with the largest
>> antlers?
>> A: A moose pad.
>> :-D
>> Would you rather pass data in move mode (*nix piping) or locate mode
>> (Pipes) or via disk (JCL)?  Why do you think you rarely see *nix commands
>> with more than a dozen filters, while Pipelines specifications are commonly
>> over 100s of stages, and 1000s of stages are not uncommon.
>> REXX is the new C.
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 28, 2025, 05:49 Rony G. Flatscher <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> ooRexx being a dynamic language usually allows for defining, e.g.
>>> classes statically with
>>> directives, but also dynamically at runtime instantiating .class (and
>>> creating and assigning methods
>>> and the like).
>>>
>>> The ::options directive has become quite powerful and it would be
>>> helpful to be able to a) query all
>>> package's current settings and b) allowing to change the (::options
>>> related) package settings at
>>> runtime ("dynamic"). (Maybe a proper Options class may be helpful which
>>> allows for interrogating and
>>> setting options.)
>>>
>>> This may help in situations like using (maybe older) Rexx programs for
>>> which some settings should be
>>> changed (like "any syntax", but also "trace ..." comes to mind, etc.).
>>>
>>> Would that be seen as a desired improvement?
>>>
>>> ---rony
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Oorexx-devel mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Oorexx-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
>
_______________________________________________
Oorexx-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel

Reply via email to