[Oorexx-users] (no subject)
-- Kind regards ___ Oorexx-users mailing list Oorexx-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-users
Re: [Oorexx-users] (no subject)
Chip, The trouble with this suggestion is that a simple typo could *create* a new directory, which must then be manually deleted. Of course one could make the same mistrake with "mkdir" itself, but there the irror would be more obvious :-) Les On 2/4/2016 1:26 PM, Chip Davis wrote: > IMHO this is a software blivet (Def: "50 kg of manure in a 40 kg bag"). > > The DIRECTORY() function is trying to do three things with the ability > to return only one string: > 1. Return the current directory > 2. Create a new directory > 3. Change to a new directory > > This is at least one operation too many, because the returned string > that makes sense for one operation does not make sense for others. > > I argue that is should _always_ return the current directory, because > that is its default behavior, and to make it easy to revert to that > directory after (potentially) changing it. > > That does not eliminate the possibility of indicating whether or not > the creation of a new directory was successful. > > So if I had designed that routine, here is the set of behaviors: > > DIRECTORY() returns current directory > > DIRECTORY('existing-dir') returns current directory, then makes > 'existing-dir' the current directory > > DIRECTORY('new_dir') returns current directory, then creates > 'new-dir', then makes 'new-dir' the current directory IFF creation > successful > > Because of the aggregation of the three operations, when changing > directories a prudent programmer should always compare the response > from DIRECTORY() to see if it matches the argument passed. If so, the > operation was successful. > > If not, either something happened to 'existing-dir', or the creation > of 'new-dir' was not successful. Regardless, further operations to > that directory should not be attempted. > > This is no more effort that testing for a null string returned value > and far more consistent. > > -Chip- > > On 2/4/2016 10:42 AM, Les Koehler wrote: >> I find the Regina OS/2 Help just as confusing! First, it starts with a >> simple declarative and non-contradictory sentence: >> >> - clip - >> Returns the current directory for the running process, and optionally >> changes directory to the specified new directory. >> - eclip - >> >> I've seen this technique in ooRexx before and it's quite logical. It >> provides, in one operation, the name of the directory to restore *and* >> switches to the new (presumably valid) directory. Neat! >> >> However, the sentences that follow *modify* the previous declarative >> sentence, thus creating confusion: >> >> - clip - >> If the new directory >> exists, and the change to new directory succeeds, the new directory is >> returned. If the new directory does not exist or an error occurred changing >> to that new directory, the empty string is returned. >> - eclip - >> >> The original Object Rexx Beta Draft was much clearer: >> >> - clip - >> returns the current directory, first changing it to NewDirectory if an >> argument is supplied and the named directory exists. If NewDirectory is >> not specified, the name of the current directory is returned. Otherwise, >> an attempt is made to change to the specified NewDirectory. If >> successful, the name of the NewDirectory is returned; if an error >> occurred, null is returned. >> - eclip - >> >> Maybe its just me, but this is a prime example of non-professional >> writers trying to *improve* what an expert writer wrote to begin with! >> Generally speaking, we should guard against such changes. >> >> Les >> >> >> >> On 2/4/2016 2:59 AM, Jon Wolfers wrote: >>> Hi Bert, >>> >>> this thread has suddenly become quite complex and sensitive. I hope that >>> the nuances in my reply come through. >>> >>> Firstly, I did see your response about your experience on VM. I would not >>> expect VM to behave in the same way as Windows. The filesystem is >>> different. It is nearly a quarter century since I had my hands on a VM >>> system, but I don't remember there being a directory structure at all just >>> filename filetype and Disk[mode] - perhaps I'm remembering wrong. >>> >>> Secondly, the code as you posted it doesn't demonstrate how the directory >>> function actually behaved at that time, in fact, reading your post I can't >>> even be certain of how you expected it to behave. I read several >>> possibilities into this scenario, including one where the documentation was >>> just as ambiguous then, and the interpreter writers intention was the same >>> then as the observed behaviour today. >>> >>> You say "all implementations of the language should match" and you go on to >>> establish a principle of prior precedent. Now I don't know what you mean >>> by 'should', I would agree that *gratuitous* change should be avoided. I >>> think that the reason that this is desirable is not because the language >>> needs to be fixed in stone, but because changes cause programs out there to >>>
Re: [Oorexx-users] (no subject)
I find the Regina OS/2 Help just as confusing! First, it starts with a simple declarative and non-contradictory sentence: - clip - Returns the current directory for the running process, and optionally changes directory to the specified new directory. - eclip - I've seen this technique in ooRexx before and it's quite logical. It provides, in one operation, the name of the directory to restore *and* switches to the new (presumably valid) directory. Neat! However, the sentences that follow *modify* the previous declarative sentence, thus creating confusion: - clip - If the new directory exists, and the change to new directory succeeds, the new directory is returned. If the new directory does not exist or an error occurred changing to that new directory, the empty string is returned. - eclip - The original Object Rexx Beta Draft was much clearer: - clip - returns the current directory, first changing it to NewDirectory if an argument is supplied and the named directory exists. If NewDirectory is not specified, the name of the current directory is returned. Otherwise, an attempt is made to change to the specified NewDirectory. If successful, the name of the NewDirectory is returned; if an error occurred, null is returned. - eclip - Maybe its just me, but this is a prime example of non-professional writers trying to *improve* what an expert writer wrote to begin with! Generally speaking, we should guard against such changes. Les On 2/4/2016 2:59 AM, Jon Wolfers wrote: > Hi Bert, > > this thread has suddenly become quite complex and sensitive. I hope that > the nuances in my reply come through. > > Firstly, I did see your response about your experience on VM. I would not > expect VM to behave in the same way as Windows. The filesystem is > different. It is nearly a quarter century since I had my hands on a VM > system, but I don't remember there being a directory structure at all just > filename filetype and Disk[mode] - perhaps I'm remembering wrong. > > Secondly, the code as you posted it doesn't demonstrate how the directory > function actually behaved at that time, in fact, reading your post I can't > even be certain of how you expected it to behave. I read several > possibilities into this scenario, including one where the documentation was > just as ambiguous then, and the interpreter writers intention was the same > then as the observed behaviour today. > > You say "all implementations of the language should match" and you go on to > establish a principle of prior precedent. Now I don't know what you mean > by 'should', I would agree that *gratuitous* change should be avoided. I > think that the reason that this is desirable is not because the language > needs to be fixed in stone, but because changes cause programs out there to > break. > > I don't know how the directory BIF worked on Object Rexx for OS/2 or the > system interpeter on VM, but I have verified to my satisfaction by looking > at the code in the ooRexx repository that the current behaviour has been > present on ooRexx for Windows and Linux for at least the last eight years, > and possibly more. > > I don't know how other interpreters work - although looking at the manuals > I have for Personal Rexx & Kexx I see that they each handle this very > differently. Regina appears to have a directory BIF for OS/2 only and the > helpfile seems to indicate that the behaviour in Regina for OS/2 is exactly > the same as what happens in ooRexx currently. I hope Mark doesn't mind, > but I quote the Regina OS/2 help below. > > Now, given that it isn't possible to have all rexx interpreters working > exactly the same, because we see such a spread of behaviour, and that the > current behaviour in ooRexx for Windows and Linux has been in place for a > long time, I would say that changing this behaviour to match some behaviour > that might have existed on some interpreter on some platform in the past > would break more currently active code than recognising that this change > may have occurred in the past and that the helpfile is ambiguous and > correcting the helpfile suitably. > > I hope that that makes my position on this clear. Sorry if it opens a can > of worms. > > Jon > > > Regina's Directory BIF for OS/2 helpfile: > >> DIRECTORY([new directory]) - (OS/2) >> Returns the current directory for the running process, and optionally >> changes directory to the specified new directory. If the new directory >> exists, and the change to new directory succeeds, the new directory is >> returned. If the new directory does not exist or an error occurred changing >> to that new directory, the empty string is returned. > > > > On 4 February 2016 at 02:03, Bertram Moshier> wrote: > >> Hi Jon, >> >> . >>> I would say that this is a documentation bug as the documentation lists >>> two different behaviours which can't both be right, and the code only >>> displays
Re: [Oorexx-users] (no subject)
Reasonable (but wishful) thinking... This reminds me of the value bif (returns current value and optionally sets the new value) Greetings Walter -- Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=272487151=/4140 ___ Oorexx-users mailing list Oorexx-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-users
Re: [Oorexx-users] (no subject)
- clip - returns the current directory, first changing it to NewDirectory if an argument is supplied and the named directory exists. If NewDirectory is not specified, the name of the current directory is returned. Otherwise, an attempt is made to change to the specified NewDirectory. If successful, the name of the NewDirectory is returned; if an error occurred, null is returned. - eclip - Yes, I agree the text you found is clearer. Jon On 4 February 2016 at 15:42, Les Koehlerwrote: > I find the Regina OS/2 Help just as confusing! First, it starts with a > simple declarative and non-contradictory sentence: > > - clip - > Returns the current directory for the running process, and optionally > changes directory to the specified new directory. > - eclip - > > I've seen this technique in ooRexx before and it's quite logical. It > provides, in one operation, the name of the directory to restore *and* > switches to the new (presumably valid) directory. Neat! > > However, the sentences that follow *modify* the previous declarative > sentence, thus creating confusion: > > - clip - > If the new directory > exists, and the change to new directory succeeds, the new directory is > returned. If the new directory does not exist or an error occurred changing > to that new directory, the empty string is returned. > - eclip - > > The original Object Rexx Beta Draft was much clearer: > > - clip - > returns the current directory, first changing it to NewDirectory if an > argument is supplied and the named directory exists. If NewDirectory is not > specified, the name of the current directory is returned. Otherwise, an > attempt is made to change to the specified NewDirectory. If successful, the > name of the NewDirectory is returned; if an error occurred, null is > returned. > - eclip - > > Maybe its just me, but this is a prime example of non-professional writers > trying to *improve* what an expert writer wrote to begin with! Generally > speaking, we should guard against such changes. > > Les > > > > On 2/4/2016 2:59 AM, Jon Wolfers wrote: > >> Hi Bert, >> >> this thread has suddenly become quite complex and sensitive. I hope that >> the nuances in my reply come through. >> >> Firstly, I did see your response about your experience on VM. I would not >> expect VM to behave in the same way as Windows. The filesystem is >> different. It is nearly a quarter century since I had my hands on a VM >> system, but I don't remember there being a directory structure at all just >> filename filetype and Disk[mode] - perhaps I'm remembering wrong. >> >> Secondly, the code as you posted it doesn't demonstrate how the directory >> function actually behaved at that time, in fact, reading your post I >> can't >> even be certain of how you expected it to behave. I read several >> possibilities into this scenario, including one where the documentation >> was >> just as ambiguous then, and the interpreter writers intention was the same >> then as the observed behaviour today. >> >> You say "all implementations of the language should match" and you go on >> to >> establish a principle of prior precedent. Now I don't know what you mean >> by 'should', I would agree that *gratuitous* change should be avoided. I >> >> think that the reason that this is desirable is not because the language >> needs to be fixed in stone, but because changes cause programs out there >> to >> break. >> >> I don't know how the directory BIF worked on Object Rexx for OS/2 or the >> system interpeter on VM, but I have verified to my satisfaction by looking >> at the code in the ooRexx repository that the current behaviour has been >> present on ooRexx for Windows and Linux for at least the last eight years, >> and possibly more. >> >> I don't know how other interpreters work - although looking at the manuals >> I have for Personal Rexx & Kexx I see that they each handle this very >> differently. Regina appears to have a directory BIF for OS/2 only and the >> helpfile seems to indicate that the behaviour in Regina for OS/2 is >> exactly >> the same as what happens in ooRexx currently. I hope Mark doesn't mind, >> but I quote the Regina OS/2 help below. >> >> Now, given that it isn't possible to have all rexx interpreters working >> exactly the same, because we see such a spread of behaviour, and that the >> current behaviour in ooRexx for Windows and Linux has been in place for a >> long time, I would say that changing this behaviour to match some >> behaviour >> that might have existed on some interpreter on some platform in the past >> would break more currently active code than recognising that this change >> may have occurred in the past and that the helpfile is ambiguous and >> correcting the helpfile suitably. >> >> I hope that that makes my position on this clear. Sorry if it opens a can >> of worms. >> >> Jon >> >> >> Regina's Directory BIF for OS/2 helpfile:
Re: [Oorexx-users] (no subject)
Hi Bert, this thread has suddenly become quite complex and sensitive. I hope that the nuances in my reply come through. Firstly, I did see your response about your experience on VM. I would not expect VM to behave in the same way as Windows. The filesystem is different. It is nearly a quarter century since I had my hands on a VM system, but I don't remember there being a directory structure at all just filename filetype and Disk[mode] - perhaps I'm remembering wrong. Secondly, the code as you posted it doesn't demonstrate how the directory function actually behaved at that time, in fact, reading your post I can't even be certain of how you expected it to behave. I read several possibilities into this scenario, including one where the documentation was just as ambiguous then, and the interpreter writers intention was the same then as the observed behaviour today. You say "all implementations of the language should match" and you go on to establish a principle of prior precedent. Now I don't know what you mean by 'should', I would agree that *gratuitous* change should be avoided. I think that the reason that this is desirable is not because the language needs to be fixed in stone, but because changes cause programs out there to break. I don't know how the directory BIF worked on Object Rexx for OS/2 or the system interpeter on VM, but I have verified to my satisfaction by looking at the code in the ooRexx repository that the current behaviour has been present on ooRexx for Windows and Linux for at least the last eight years, and possibly more. I don't know how other interpreters work - although looking at the manuals I have for Personal Rexx & Kexx I see that they each handle this very differently. Regina appears to have a directory BIF for OS/2 only and the helpfile seems to indicate that the behaviour in Regina for OS/2 is exactly the same as what happens in ooRexx currently. I hope Mark doesn't mind, but I quote the Regina OS/2 help below. Now, given that it isn't possible to have all rexx interpreters working exactly the same, because we see such a spread of behaviour, and that the current behaviour in ooRexx for Windows and Linux has been in place for a long time, I would say that changing this behaviour to match some behaviour that might have existed on some interpreter on some platform in the past would break more currently active code than recognising that this change may have occurred in the past and that the helpfile is ambiguous and correcting the helpfile suitably. I hope that that makes my position on this clear. Sorry if it opens a can of worms. Jon Regina's Directory BIF for OS/2 helpfile: > DIRECTORY([new directory]) - (OS/2) > Returns the current directory for the running process, and optionally > changes directory to the specified new directory. If the new directory > exists, and the change to new directory succeeds, the new directory is > returned. If the new directory does not exist or an error occurred changing > to that new directory, the empty string is returned. On 4 February 2016 at 02:03, Bertram Moshierwrote: > Hi Jon, > > . >> I would say that this is a documentation bug as the documentation lists >> two different behaviours which can't both be right, and the code only >> displays one of these behaviors. > > > I think my earlier email about find a VM/CMS example went though, but in > case it didn't (I sent it from a tablet). I found an example in my old > notes, while at Cray Research, Inc, of using it as: > > Current_Dir = directory(New_Dir) where New_Dir was a valid location. > > I also think I successfully used this coding using classic Rexx under OS/2 > Warp, but have yet to find my old OS/2 Warp drives. > > As all implementations of the language should match and VM/CMS, OS/2 Warp, > MVS, etc all came earlier, I'd say the documentation and code both are off > in their own ways. The documentation needs to be clear, obviously. Also > the implementation should allow functions, such as the directory, to > function the same regardless. > > Would this be two bug reports or one for two areas? > > Bert. > > > -- > Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance > APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month > Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now > Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now! > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=272487151=/4140 > ___ > Oorexx-users mailing list > Oorexx-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-users > > -- Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month Monitor
Re: [Oorexx-users] (no subject)
On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 8:59 AM, Jon Wolferswrote: > > Now, given that it isn't possible to have all rexx interpreters working > exactly the same, because we see such a spread of behaviour, and that the > current behaviour in ooRexx for Windows and Linux has been in place for a > long time, I would say that changing this behaviour to match some behaviour > that might have existed on some interpreter on some platform in the past > would break more currently active code than recognising that this change > may have occurred in the past and that the helpfile is ambiguous and > correcting the helpfile suitably. > I fully agree. We should be more concerned about not breaking ooRexx instead of making it compatible to some other version of Rexx. I'd vote for adjusting the documentation and leave it as that. We could even add a note saying that ooRexx's directory bif might be different from old versions of Rexx. Moritz -- Moritz Hoffmann; http://antiguru.de/ -- Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=272487151=/4140___ Oorexx-users mailing list Oorexx-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-users
[Oorexx-users] (no subject)
Hi Jon, . > I would say that this is a documentation bug as the documentation lists > two different behaviours which can't both be right, and the code only > displays one of these behaviors. I think my earlier email about find a VM/CMS example went though, but in case it didn't (I sent it from a tablet). I found an example in my old notes, while at Cray Research, Inc, of using it as: Current_Dir = directory(New_Dir) where New_Dir was a valid location. I also think I successfully used this coding using classic Rexx under OS/2 Warp, but have yet to find my old OS/2 Warp drives. As all implementations of the language should match and VM/CMS, OS/2 Warp, MVS, etc all came earlier, I'd say the documentation and code both are off in their own ways. The documentation needs to be clear, obviously. Also the implementation should allow functions, such as the directory, to function the same regardless. Would this be two bug reports or one for two areas? Bert. -- Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=272487151=/4140___ Oorexx-users mailing list Oorexx-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-users
Re: [Oorexx-users] (no subject)
An AskDialog always comes up in the centre of the screen. When you hit “Yes” or “No” on the AskDialog, the dialog ends and so disappears from the screen. Now, your code has several AskDialogs appearing one after the other. And if you move the first AsklDialog from the centre, then hit either Yes or No, then that dialog ends and closes - i.e. disappears. BUT - your code immediately brings up a *new* AskDialog, which appears, as did the first, In the centre of the screen. This sequence looks as if the original AskDialog has moved. But it hasn’t – it just ended and the new one appeared. Maybe you need to build a dialog that has some radio buttons in it, so you can select all the options you need, and then press Enter (or whatever). If it would help (let me know) I’ll see if I can build such a dialog for you as an example. However, unfortunately I’m not able at this point to *promise* to do so any time soon. Atb, Oliver From: Bertram Moshier [mailto:bertrammosh...@gmail.com] Sent: 27 February 2015 22:09 To: oorexx-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [Oorexx-users] (no subject) Hello again Oliver, Sounds a bit weird - don?t know if I can help, but what kind of dialog is it ? i.e. what?s its superclass (e.g. UserDialog)? Oh, weird?! Ah. Well, I'm learning to the ooDialog by using bits and pieces of sample code. Thus maybe I'm incorrectly using a call or something. Here is a snippet of the code. Background: This Rexx program allows the user to set the Power Plan for the system. Originally written only to support passed parameters (e.g. PowerPlan High or PowerPlan GoodNight, I added Dialog in two places. One displays a list of the power plans and allows the user to select one of them. The other toggles between two plans (High Performance and a Good Night plan I created). Code Snippet: if GBL.parameter.0 = 2 , ((abbrev('DIALOG',upper(GBL.parameter.1),1)| , abbrev('DIALOG',upper(GBL.parameter.2),1)), (abbrev('TOGGLE',upper(GBL.parameter.1),1)| , abbrev('TOGGLE',upper(GBL.parameter.2),1)))then do if PowerPlanName.DialogAnswer HighPerf, PowerPlanName.DialogAnswer GoodNight then do call !!Say_Directed 4,'w','Current ' || PowerPlanName.DialogAnswer || ' is not valid for Dialog Toggle. Changing the current power plan to ' || HighPerf || ' and continuing.' PowerCMD '-setactive' HighPerfGUID DialogAnswer = HighPerfPCL end msg = 'Toggle Power Plan? Yes or No (Quit)' || .endOfLine~copies(2) || , 'Current Power Plan is' PowerPlanName.DialogAnswer do while AskDialog(msg, 'Y') select when PowerPlanName.DialogAnswer = HighPerf then do PowerCMD '-setactive' GoodNightGUID call !!Say_Directed 10,'i','Power plan changed to Good Night (' || GoodNightGUID || '). Reqest is: Dialog Toggle.' PowerPlanName.DialogAnswer = GoodNight end when PowerPlanName.DialogAnswer = GoodNight then do PowerCMD '-setactive' HighPerfGUID call !!Say_Directed 10,'i','Power plan changed to High Performance (' || HighPerfGUID || '). Reqest is: Dialog Toggle.' PowerPlanName.DialogAnswer = HighPerf end otherwise do nop end end msg = 'Toggle Power Plan? Yes or No (Quit)' || .endOfLine~copies(2) || , 'Current Power Plan is' PowerPlanName.DialogAnswer end call !!Say_Directed 1201,'i','Dialog terminated. Current power plan is ' || PowerPlanName.DialogAnswer || '.' call !!EOJ 0 end else if GBL.parameter.0 = 2 then do call !!Say_Directed 1200,'e','Invalid double parameter combination. They must be Dialog and Toggle.' call !!EOJ 1200 end I chose the AskDialog call because all I need is a Yes or No (Yes, toggle; No, end). Maybe I'm expecting too much from AskDialog to stay where put, as it is a message. If so, * What is a better call given the toggle idea and the existing code? * What is a good way to learn how to use ooDialog? * Also a good resource compiler? Thank you, Oliver, for your two replies thus far. :-) Bert. -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/___ Oorexx-users mailing list Oorexx-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-users
[Oorexx-users] (no subject)
Hello again Oliver, Sounds a bit weird - don?t know if I can help, but what kind of dialog is it ? i.e. what?s its superclass (e.g. UserDialog)? Oh, weird?! Ah. Well, I'm learning to the ooDialog by using bits and pieces of sample code. Thus maybe I'm incorrectly using a call or something. Here is a snippet of the code. Background: This Rexx program allows the user to set the Power Plan for the system. Originally written only to support passed parameters (e.g. PowerPlan High or PowerPlan GoodNight, I added Dialog in two places. One displays a list of the power plans and allows the user to select one of them. The other toggles between two plans (High Performance and a Good Night plan I created). Code Snippet: if GBL.parameter.0 = 2 , ((abbrev('DIALOG',upper(GBL.parameter.1),1)| , abbrev('DIALOG',upper(GBL.parameter.2),1)), (abbrev('TOGGLE',upper(GBL.parameter.1),1)| , abbrev('TOGGLE',upper(GBL.parameter.2),1)))then do if PowerPlanName.DialogAnswer HighPerf, PowerPlanName.DialogAnswer GoodNight then do call !!Say_Directed 4,'w','Current ' || PowerPlanName.DialogAnswer || ' is not valid for Dialog Toggle. Changing the current power plan to ' || HighPerf || ' and continuing.' PowerCMD '-setactive' HighPerfGUID DialogAnswer = HighPerfPCL end msg = 'Toggle Power Plan? Yes or No (Quit)' || .endOfLine~copies(2) || , 'Current Power Plan is' PowerPlanName.DialogAnswer do while AskDialog(msg, 'Y') select when PowerPlanName.DialogAnswer = HighPerf then do PowerCMD '-setactive' GoodNightGUID call !!Say_Directed 10,'i','Power plan changed to Good Night (' || GoodNightGUID || '). Reqest is: Dialog Toggle.' PowerPlanName.DialogAnswer = GoodNight end when PowerPlanName.DialogAnswer = GoodNight then do PowerCMD '-setactive' HighPerfGUID call !!Say_Directed 10,'i','Power plan changed to High Performance (' || HighPerfGUID || '). Reqest is: Dialog Toggle.' PowerPlanName.DialogAnswer = HighPerf end otherwise do nop end end msg = 'Toggle Power Plan? Yes or No (Quit)' || .endOfLine~copies(2) || , 'Current Power Plan is' PowerPlanName.DialogAnswer end call !!Say_Directed 1201,'i','Dialog terminated. Current power plan is ' || PowerPlanName.DialogAnswer || '.' call !!EOJ 0 end else if GBL.parameter.0 = 2 then do call !!Say_Directed 1200,'e','Invalid double parameter combination. They must be Dialog and Toggle.' call !!EOJ 1200 end I chose the AskDialog call because all I need is a Yes or No (Yes, toggle; No, end). Maybe I'm expecting too much from AskDialog to stay where put, as it is a message. If so, - What is a better call given the toggle idea and the existing code? - What is a good way to learn how to use ooDialog? - Also a good resource compiler? Thank you, Oliver, for your two replies thus far. :-) Bert. -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/___ Oorexx-users mailing list Oorexx-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-users
[Oorexx-users] (no subject)
Hello David and all others, The rexxc program (supplied with ooRexx) can remove the ability of anyone from seeing the original source code. But be sure to save a copy of the original source as you can not get it back from the code produced by rexxc Thank you so very much! Bert. -- Meet PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance Requirements with EventLog Analyzer Achieve PCI DSS 3.0 Compliant Status with Out-of-the-box PCI DSS Reports Are you Audit-Ready for PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance? Download White paper Comply to PCI DSS 3.0 Requirement 10 and 11.5 with EventLog Analyzer http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=154622311iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk___ Oorexx-users mailing list Oorexx-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-users
[Oorexx-users] (no subject)
The Open Object Rexx Development Team is proud to announce the availability of ooRexx 4.1.2. This is a bug fix only release, with 15 to 20 bugs fixed. Installation packages for ooRexx are available immediately on SourceForge. You can download ooRexx 4.1.2 from: http://sourceforge.net/projects/oorexx/files/oorexx/4.1.2/ Complete documentation in PDF and HTML format can be downloaded from: http://sourceforge.net/projects/oorexx/files/oorexx-docs/4.1.2/ Download the CHANGES document, in the ooRex files area, to see the list of fixes. The _ReadMe.pdf or _ReadMe.html file contain additional information concerning the release. If you discover bugs please open a bug report at: http://sourceforge.net/p/oorexx/bugs/ -- The ooRexx Development Team -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Oorexx-users mailing list Oorexx-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-users