An IBMer sent me this.
Any known bugs on the directory() command ? I am finding it
possessed.. I issue it.. even ask it where I am afterwards.. it says
where I expect.. but then my next command that runs a program is running
one in the place I was in before I issued the directory command (which
Standard response...open a bug report with a sample that demonstrates the
problem.
Rick
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 9:25 AM, David Ashley w.david.ash...@gmail.comwrote:
An IBMer sent me this.
Any known bugs on the directory() command ? I am finding it
possessed.. I issue it.. even ask it
Hi David,
You probably know this, and it is probably something else,but this often
gotchas me, just in case it is what is happening for you here.
If you are on Windows and you use the windows fileName dialog it quietly
changes the path to the path of the file you open or save.
maybe that is
Any known bugs on the directory() command ? I am finding it
possessed.. I issue it.. even ask it where I am afterwards..
it says where I expect.. but then my next command that runs a
program is running one in the place I was in before I issued
the directory command (which is the
Alcon;
In the following, it appears that the argument number inserted in the
message is not correct. It seems it should be 2, not 1.
301 *-* RC.Worst:
302 *-* procedure
303 *-* RetRC = arg(1)
4
The min() builtin just forwards the arguments as a method call using the
first argument as the target. From the standpoint of the place where the
error is detected, this is the correct position.
Rick
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Hobart Spitz orexx...@gmail.com wrote:
Alcon;
In the
Got it. Thanks. I should have guessed.
I take it that setting a fromFunction flag (to 1) e.g. in function calls
and adding it to the argument number in messages is too much work for too
little gain...
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Rick McGuire object.r...@gmail.com wrote:
The min()
The min() builtin just forwards the arguments as a method call using the first
argument as the target. From the standpoint of the place where the error is
detected, this is the correct position.
Not from the programmer's point of view, perhaps :-). The min() BIF could
check the
Mark Miesfeld wrote:
Debian 5.0
We know that on pure Debian systems, the problem shows up. It's never been
reported elsewhere.
Interesting that the dependencies were not griped about on Ubuntu 8.04 LTS in
that case. I recall years ago it was necessary to build a specific Debian Etch
Mark Miesfeld wrote:
There have been a few problems reported with SysFileTree under different
circumstances on different operating systems. They do not seem to be easy to
reproduce on a different system than the one
where the problem was reported..
So there is probably some memory
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 12:33 PM, Michael Lueck mlu...@lueckdatasystems.com
wrote:
Mark Miesfeld wrote:
There have been a few problems reported with SysFileTree under different
circumstances on different operating systems. They do not seem to be easy
to reproduce on a different system than
I was shown a non-Rexx workaround to my request...
find . -name '*.html' -size +0c -ls
(head shaking) Linux is just so much easier... I do not know why everyone does
not run it. ;-)
--
Michael Lueck
Lueck Data Systems
http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/
Greetings Mark,
Thanks for ack'ing my request! :-)
Mark Miesfeld wrote:
By the way, ooRexx builds on Ubuntu without any problem that I've seen.
Could it be that I installed the version built for 10.04 on 8.04?
Shall I try building on 8.04 x64 and see if that package does not have the same
Greetings,
I just tried this on Ubuntu 10.04 x64 and it does not fail.
The other box I tried it on (which failed) is running Ubuntu 8.04 x64.
So must be some issue with running the 10.04 package on 8.04 in this case.
Is there space on the ooRexx build machine to set up an instance of 8.04?
Or
Hi Michael,
There have been a few problems reported with SysFileTree under different
circumstances on different operating systems. They do not seem to be easy
to reproduce on a different system than the one where the problem was
reported..
So there is probably some memory management problem
Greetings,
I am tracking down some bewildering output from a simple program using
SysFileTree.
I am getting very strange output on ooRexx 4.1 x64, and getting the expected
output from ooRexx 4.1 x86.
The output is as follows, working version first:
16 matches
Mail list logo
