Re: [Oorexx-devel] Comments and discussion about ADDRESS WITH

On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 9:56 AM, Gil Barmwater wrote: > Rick, > > Thanks for the update. It answered the questions I was about to ask > before I got to ask them! I will do an SVN update to get the latest > versions of things and start the integration of the I/O

[Oorexx-devel] Comments and discussion about ADDRESS WITH

Gil, The addressWith sandbox version now builds cleanly. Basically, everything is in place except for the code in SystemCommands.cpp that performs the I/O redirects with the shell. As part of this, I added a dummy TEST address handler to SystemCommands so I can start writing unit tests to test of

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Comments and discussion about ADDRESS WITH

Rick, Thanks for the update.  It answered the questions I was about to ask before I got to ask them!  I will do an SVN update to get the latest versions of things and start the integration of the I/O redirection into SystemCommands.cpp. On your point 1), yes, I do need the ability to

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Progress update for ADDRESS WITH

> > The current code in the command handler attempts to first execute the > command directly, without invoking CMD/COMMAND > That's interesting. If you issue the command "ver" from the command line, you'll see the output from the CMD's "ver" command and not the output from any "ver.exe" that

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Comments and discussion about ADDRESS WITH

On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 12:38 PM, Erich Steinböck wrote: > I've added preliminary "static" addess-with tests (they don't execute real > commands) > I also changed READY to READY: because this is what open returns and what > the STREAM options tests for. > > The tests

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Progress update for ADDRESS WITH

The interface vector will always be supplied, so it is necessary to test each of the streams. It would be a simple matter for a single check API to be added. Rick On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 12:46 PM, Erich Steinböck wrote: > You'll be passed a small interface vector

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Progress update for ADDRESS WITH

> > It would be a simple matter for a single check API to be added > I'd vote for it. -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org!

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Progress update for ADDRESS WITH

Yes, me too.  The current code in the command handler attempts to first execute the command directly, without invoking CMD/COMMAND but only if no redirection was specified (i.e. no <,  >, |, etc.).  We now have a second way to specify redirection - a valid WITH clause - so an API that says if

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Comments and discussion about ADDRESS WITH

I've added preliminary "static" addess-with tests (they don't execute real commands) I also changed READY to READY: because this is what open returns and what the STREAM options tests for. The tests show a few quirks (marked with @@ in the test group), like: - should `address '' '' with` be

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Progress update for ADDRESS WITH

> > You'll be passed a small interface vector with just 6 functions: > IsInputRedirected(), IsOutputRedirected(), IsErrorRedirected(), > ReadInput(), WriteOutput(), WriteError(). What is the suggested method for a command handler to figure out whether at all there is some redirection to be done?

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Comments and discussion about ADDRESS WITH

On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 12:38 PM, Erich Steinböck wrote: > I've added preliminary "static" addess-with tests (they don't execute real > commands) > I also changed READY to READY: because this is what open returns and what > the STREAM options tests for. > > The tests

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Comments and discussion about ADDRESS WITH

> > >>- `address '' '' with` be allowed with no actual redirection? >> >> That's probably not what you're thinking it is. That would be considered > the implicit ADDRESS VALUE form > What's the "implicit ADDRESS VALUE form"? How would I send the empty command to the default environment with

[Oorexx-devel] ADDRESS WITH RexxQueue support

I added RexxQueue output support because I discovered that it was actually support on input because it already supported on input because the RexxQueue class supported makearray. Rick -- Check out the vibrant tech

Re: [Oorexx-devel] ADDRESS WITH RexxQueue support

Please ignore my earlier (first) post on this topic.  You wrote RexxQueue and I read RXQUEUE, the filter program.  Oops! Gil On 4/2/2018 6:19 PM, Rick McGuire wrote: I added RexxQueue output support because I discovered that it was actually support on input because it already supported on

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Comments and discussion about ADDRESS WITH

On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 5:33 PM, Erich Steinböck wrote: > >>>- `address '' '' with` be allowed with no actual redirection? >>> >>> That's probably not what you're thinking it is. That would be considered >> the implicit ADDRESS VALUE form >> > > What's the