of
> CM Poncelet
> Sent: Tuesday, September 8, 2020 7:53 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)
>
> Mr Bridges,
>
> 1) The reason the program does not abend is it has a "SIGNAL ON SYNTAX
> NAME ERROR3"
@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)
Confused? Difficult to say--the brash nature of this debate is clouding
things.
There is an example above which uses something like ''0001'B to
initialise a variable.
In Rexx, that is not a boolean value. Depending on which
I dunno, though, the first part of it was entertaining. And as I'm not a
systems programmer (I came into mainframe security through the development
door), many of the more on-topic threads here are opaque to me, so the
occasional fight over COBOL or CLIST provides some diversion.
---
Bob
On 2020-09-10 8:05 PM, Rupert Reynolds wrote:
Confused? Difficult to say--the brash nature of this debate is clouding
things.
Perfect example of bike shedding! A rambling thread where people argue
over stuff that is not really useful! IBMMAIN is difficult to read these
days.
The good stuff
Confused? Difficult to say--the brash nature of this debate is clouding
things.
There is an example above which uses something like ''0001'B to
initialise a variable.
In Rexx, that is not a boolean value. Depending on which interpreter you
use, it is either a byte with contents x'01', which
Sent: Tuesday, September 8, 2020 7:53 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)
>
> Mr Bridges,
>
> 1) The reason the program does not abend is it has a "SIGNAL ON SYNTAX
> NAME ERROR3" coded before the "IF TRUE THE
On Wed, 9 Sep 2020 00:45:12 -0400, Phil Smith III wrote:
>Y'all are dancing on the head of a pin. As Shmuel said, Rexx has one datatype,
>period. It has the DATATYPE function that can do some
>analysis on a variable's contents and tell you whether it's all numeric, hex,
>etc. That's basically
Subject: Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)
Mr Bridges,
1) The reason the program does not abend is it has a "SIGNAL ON SYNTAX
NAME ERROR3" coded before the "IF TRUE THEN...", which traps the abend
and resumes execution at label ERROR3.
2) I disagree with Mr
Y'all are dancing on the head of a pin. As Shmuel said, Rexx has one datatype,
period. It has the DATATYPE function that can do some
analysis on a variable's contents and tell you whether it's all numeric, hex,
etc. That's basically it. Arguing about whether it's a
"string" or a "character
Don't bother. IBM will reply NAPWAD (not a problem, working as
designed). ;-)
On 08/09/2020 16:22, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
> (cross-posting to IBM-Main and TSO-REXX)
> On 2020-09-08, at 00:23:52, CM Poncelet wrote:
>> A *character* string is either any string that has DATATYPE CHAR but not
>>
Mr Bridges,
1) The reason the program does not abend is it has a "SIGNAL ON SYNTAX
NAME ERROR3" coded before the "IF TRUE THEN...", which traps the abend
and resumes execution at label ERROR3.
2) I disagree with Mr Metz on the grounds that he argues that
"everything in REXX is a character
;
Sent: Tuesday, September 8, 2020 11:22 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)
(cross-posting to IBM-Main and TSO-REXX)
On 2020-09-08, at 00:23:52, CM Poncelet wrote:
>
> A *character* string is either any string that has DATATYPE CHAR but not
&g
Mr Poncelet, I'm interested in this example. Two questions:
1) Once TRUE is set to a '1'b in the last two sections, why does the program
not abend when it encounters "IF TRUE THEN..."? Seems to me REXX should
complain that TRUE is not 1 or 0.
2) From your preceding posts I got the impression
(cross-posting to IBM-Main and TSO-REXX)
On 2020-09-08, at 00:23:52, CM Poncelet wrote:
>
> A *character* string is either any string that has DATATYPE CHAR but not
> DATATYPE NUM, or is *any* string (and it might as well then be called
> 'anything string' instead of 'character string').
>
tp://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of CM
Poncelet
Sent: Monday, September 7, 2020 10:33 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)
You said, "It isn't boolean; everything in REXX i
A *character* string is either any string that has DATATYPE CHAR but not
DATATYPE NUM, or is *any* string (and it might as well then be called
'anything string' instead of 'character string').
Q: "What's your motivation and the motivation of the recondite
examples you supplied (which I
On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 03:33:18 +0100, CM Poncelet wrote:
>You said, "It isn't boolean; everything in REXX is a character string."
>�
>I agree that "it's all strings", but not that "everything in REXX is a
>*character* string."
>�
Persuing the Rexx Reference, SA32-0972-40, I find various
/~smetz3
>
>
>
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
> CM Poncelet
> Sent: Monday, September 7, 2020 9:30 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)
>
> No, REXX has both
On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 02:30:01 +0100, CM Poncelet wrote:
>
>My mistake was to think that setting a variable to a quoted value, in
>REXX, made that variable a type CHAR. But REXX considers it to be NUM if
>it contains only numerics, regardless of whether its set value was
>
Not only numerics. For
It isn't boolean; everything in REXX is a character string.
>
>
> --
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
>
>
>
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
> CM Poncelet
> Sent: Monday, Septe
isn't boolean; everything in REXX is a character string.
>
>
> --
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
>
>
>
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
> CM Poncelet
> Sent: Monday, September 7, 2020 1
,
alas.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Bob
Bridges
Sent: Monday, September 7, 2020 8:20 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers
"Mehitabel" - wow! You're a lot older than I assumed, Mr Metz!
---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313
/* In its state of nature [a dog] has a smell, and habits, which frustrate
man's love; he washes it, house-trains it, teaches it not to steal, and is
so enabled to love it
On Mon, 7 Sep 2020 18:52:55 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>Hindsight? I never understood the purpose of the web, given that gopher and
>SGML were already here. All we were missing was a protocol called Mehitabel ;-)
>
It's easy to understand. Just remember, you're not the customer;
you're the
on behalf of
Rupert Reynolds
Sent: Sunday, September 6, 2020 5:09 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)
Hindsight is a wonderful thing :-)
On Sun, 6 Sep 2020 at 21:55, Seymour J Metz wrote:
> You didn't read The World According to A
on behalf of CM
Poncelet
Sent: Monday, September 7, 2020 1:23 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)
ARG DEBUG
IF DEBUG = 'DEBUG' THEN ,
TRACE I
TRUE = (1-1=0 & 4¬=6)
TVAL = '0011'||X2B(D2X(TRUE))
SAY 'TRUE = 'TRUE
SAY 'TVAL = 'TVAL
IF TRUE THEN
Subject: Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)
"ELSE IF ¬TRUE THEN " was just to demonstrate that "TRUE" is
Boolean.
On 07/09/2020 05:24, Seymour J Metz wrote:
> First, that code is highly obfuscated. Why would you ever want to write "IF
> foo & TR
M Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
> CM Poncelet
> Sent: Sunday, September 6, 2020 9:31 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)
>
> In the following example,
> TRUE = (1 - 1 = 0 & 1 ¬= 0) [or whatever is more app
ARG DEBUG
IF DEBUG = 'DEBUG' THEN ,
TRACE I
TRUE = (1-1=0 & 4¬=6)
TVAL = '0011'||X2B(D2X(TRUE))
SAY 'TRUE = 'TRUE
SAY 'TVAL = 'TVAL
IF TRUE THEN SAY 'TRUE'
IF TVAL THEN SAY 'TVAL'
IF ¬TRUE THEN SAY 'NOT TRUE'
IF ¬TVAL THEN SAY 'NOT TVAL'
EXIT 0
gives (in ASCII):
TRUE = 1
TVAL = 00110001
TRUE
Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of CM
Poncelet
Sent: Sunday, September 6, 2020 9:31 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)
In the following example,
TRUE =
Because I wasn't paying attention, I guess. Maybe I did do it that
way in the past, but just now the below is what I remembered. Absent of me.
---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313
/* God's never been disappointed in me, because he never had any illusions
about me. -Clay
On Mon, 7 Sep 2020 02:31:33 +0100, CM Poncelet wrote:
>In the following example,
>TRUE = (1 - 1 = 0 & 1 ¬= 0) [or whatever is more appropriate],
>it is then sufficient e.g. to code:
>IF 4 ¬= 6 & TRUE THEN
>ELSE IF ¬TRUE THEN
>
>I.e. TRUE can be defined as a Boolean '1'b in REXX, as per above.
In the following example,
TRUE = (1 - 1 = 0 & 1 ¬= 0) [or whatever is more appropriate],
it is then sufficient e.g. to code:
IF 4 ¬= 6 & TRUE THEN
ELSE IF ¬TRUE THEN
I.e. TRUE can be defined as a Boolean '1'b in REXX, as per above.
On 06/09/2020 20:43, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Sep
mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
>
>
>
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf
> of Rupert Reynolds
> Sent: Sunday, September 6, 2020 4:48 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)
>
> Loss of Internet access would have
4:48 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)
Loss of Internet access would have been sheer luxury! (insert The Four
Yorkshiremen sketch here) as this was the 1980s :-) The Internet was
there, but nobody had heard of it unless he was the sort of geek
Loss of Internet access would have been sheer luxury! (insert The Four
Yorkshiremen sketch here) as this was the 1980s :-) The Internet was
there, but nobody had heard of it unless he was the sort of geek who
soldered his own modem cable, and WWW was probably not even a twinkle in
timbl's eye
of
Rupert Reynolds
Sent: Sunday, September 6, 2020 3:45 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)
It almost boils down to a matter of style, I suppose. The only thing
against that is that I had no access to any sort of docs, as I said. I had
no way of knowing
ISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)
>
> I don't see any advantage in 'Y', because then you have to code IF or WHEN
> variable = 'Y'.
>
> The advantage of Boolean is clarity in something like:-
> /* Rexx */
> TRUE = (1=1)
> ...
> SEL
On Sun, 6 Sep 2020 12:03:18 -0400, scott Ford wrote:
>I have done things like true =‘Y’ and then
>
>If true
> ..
>end
>
What language? That would certainly be a syntax error in Rexx.
And why? You could just omit the "if true" and code:
do
..
end
n Sun, 6 Sep
@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)
To expand, I had some code monitoring input data as it arrived, waiting for
a fault condition that was in several parts, order unknown.
So I used a few Rexx variables as Booleans, as they made the conditional
code shorter
@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)
I have done things like true =‘Y’ and then
If true
..
end
Scott
On Sun, Sep 6, 2020 at 8:11 AM Rupert Reynolds wrote:
> To expand, I had some code monitoring input data as it arrived, waiting for
>
>
Subject: Re: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)
I don't see any advantage in 'Y', because then you have to code IF or WHEN
variable = 'Y'.
The advantage of Boolean is clarity in something like:-
/* Rexx */
TRUE = (1=1)
...
SELECT
WHEN logmode = "D4A32782" & (GotASCII & Got
I don't see any advantage in 'Y', because then you have to code IF or WHEN
variable = 'Y'.
The advantage of Boolean is clarity in something like:-
/* Rexx */
TRUE = (1=1)
...
SELECT
WHEN logmode = "D4A32782" & (GotASCII & GotVBMrecord) THEN do
(from a similar exec I found in archives, not the
I have done things like true =‘Y’ and then
If true
..
end
Scott
On Sun, Sep 6, 2020 at 8:11 AM Rupert Reynolds wrote:
> To expand, I had some code monitoring input data as it arrived, waiting for
>
> a fault condition that was in several parts, order unknown.
>
>
>
> So I used a few
To expand, I had some code monitoring input data as it arrived, waiting for
a fault condition that was in several parts, order unknown.
So I used a few Rexx variables as Booleans, as they made the conditional
code shorter and clearer.
But someone will reuse my code another day (perhaps me), and
On 2020-09-06 11:50, Seymour J Metz wrote:
Eschew obfuscation. Either just use 0 and one, or write
false=0;true=1. Similarly, for PL/I either just use '0'b and '1'b or
write false='0'b;true='1'b;.
VALUE is a good alternative also.
on behalf of Bob
Bridges
Sent: Saturday, September 5, 2020 4:09 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: REXX true/false (was Constant Identifiers)
I've never done that, but I have done something like it:
str=word('true false',(0-fx)+2)
...where fx is Boolean. I hope I've done it only
On Sat, 5 Sep 2020 23:36:37 +0100, Rupert Reynolds wrote:
>Writing Rexx for myself (therefore no local standards to follow) I had to
>set an internal boolean in a few places.
>So I started it with
>TRUE = (1=1)
>FALSE = \TRUE
>
Now you have them; how are they useful? (Examples?)
>That's partly
Writing Rexx for myself (therefore no local standards to follow) I had to
set an internal boolean in a few places.
So I started it with
TRUE = (1=1)
FALSE = \TRUE
That's partly because I couldn't find doc on Rexx standards (no WWW yet)
and I didn't like to assume that 1 and 0 were always valid
On Sat, 5 Sep 2020 16:09:32 -0400, Bob Bridges wrote:
>
> str=word('true false',(0-fx)+2)
>
>...where fx is Boolean.
>
My use of COPIES() was to save 2 lines of code while knowing that
the function call/return overhead is large and IF would perform better.
> if fx then str='true'; else
On Sat, 5 Sep 2020, at 21:09, Bob Bridges wrote:
> I've never done that, but I have done something like it:
>
> str=word('true false',(0-fx)+2)
Why (0-fx)+2when 2-fxis simpler?
> (If I have to explain it, it just proves I should never write it that
> way in the first place.
I've never done that, but I have done something like it:
str=word('true false',(0-fx)+2)
...where fx is Boolean. I hope I've done it only in programs I wrote for my
own use. But I sometimes write a tool for myself, then move it to a public
library on request, so that monster may be out
52 matches
Mail list logo
