See Alan's post. The ? should cause a REXX syntax error, but the dot should not.
-----Original Message----- From: VM/ESA and z/VM Discussions [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Kreuter Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2005 9:37 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: REXX Syntax REXX is as happy as EXTRACT. Here's a Q&D GG XEDIT: /**/ trace c 'EXTRACT' ? 'EXTRACT ' /* comment */ . 'EXTRACT ' /* comment */ ? 'EXTRACT /FTYPE/' /* comment */ . 'EXTRACT /FTYPE/' /* comment */ ? 'EXTRACT ' ?FTYPE? 'EXTRACT ' .FTYPE. When GG is invoked from XEDIT session: 3 *-* 'EXTRACT' ? >>> "EXTRACT ?" 4 *-* 'EXTRACT ' /* comment */ . >>> "EXTRACT ." 5 *-* 'EXTRACT ' /* comment */ ? >>> "EXTRACT ?" 6 *-* 'EXTRACT /FTYPE/' /* comment */ . >>> "EXTRACT /FTYPE/ ." +++ RC(5) +++ 7 *-* 'EXTRACT /FTYPE/' /* comment */ ? >>> "EXTRACT /FTYPE/ ?" +++ RC(5) +++ 8 *-* 'EXTRACT ' ?FTYPE? >>> "EXTRACT ?FTYPE?" 9 *-* 'EXTRACT ' .FTYPE. >>> "EXTRACT .FTYPE." Schuh, Richard wrote: >EXTRACT should never see the light of day unless this is correct REXX syntax. >So far I have found nothing to suggest that it is correct syntax, but I may be >missing something. Try substituting some other character for the period and >the syntax check does fail. It is the REXX that is in question, not the >EXTRACT. > > > > -----Original Message----- >From: VM/ESA and z/VM Discussions [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of >Brian Nielsen >Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2005 9:23 AM >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: REXX Syntax > >On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 09:01:42 -0800, Schuh, Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>I was browsing an XEDIT macro written in REXX and noticed a statement >> >> >that looked like this: > > >>'EXTRACT some values to extract' /* A COMMENT */ . >> >>The period appears to be an accident caused by its being to the right of >> >> >the display when the statement was edited. > > >>For some reason, the period following the comment is not flagged as a >> >> >syntax error. The EXTRACT works as an error free statement. If I compile >the macro, the compiler also passes the statement without error. Replacing >the period with a question mark or any other special character that I have >tried does cause an error. Is this working properly? Is there something in >the specification that makes the period a legitimate part of the syntax? > > >>======================================================================== >> >> > >When you do this EXTRACT is actually getting a RC=5 to flag the incorrect >argument. Arguments before the incorrect argument are processed, those >after it are not. EXTRACT.1 will be set to the invalid string. See usage >note 2 for the EXTRACT command. > >Brian Nielsen > > > > >
