I often use FANOUT with a single output to keep complete pipe sections close
to each other in my Rexx code.
......
'| XLATE 5 _ x', /* Preselect it */
'|JK: FANINANY',
'|LJK: LOOKUP 7.8 1.8 DETAIL',
'|STEP2: FANOUT',
'?StrLiteral X'c2x(to)'|SPLIT|PAD 8', /* Take the systems */
'|LJK:',
'?STEM UnSelSystem.',
'|JK:', /* Pass not selected systems to main stream */
'?LJK:', /* Pass not found systems to REXX */
'|JOIN * / /|CHANGE //System(s) not found: /',
'|APPEND LITERAL',
'|VAR EMSG',
'?STEP2:'
......
The FANOUT labeled STEP2, makes I can overview the pipe section displayed
above in a single XEDIT screen. FANOUT shorts itself out
when it detects it serves only a single output streeam. So almost no
overhead and my long pipes are easier to read/maintain.
2008/8/22 Rob van der Heij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 1:41 AM, Glenn Knickerbocker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>> Sometimes you need a do-nothing stage to put between connectors in
>> adding pipelines, so that short circuits don't try to cross the streams
>
> I'm not sure what you're smoking in your pipe the past days, but
> judged from the effect it seems to have, it might not be legal.
> No doubt you can insert stages in the pipeline that don't do anything
> useful, no matter what data goes through, but for what? I seem to miss
> the purpose of your research.
> Yes, fanin becomes defunct with just one input stream connected (you
> use it in a feedback pipeline, for example) where it's a syntactical
> requirement to have a stage to hold the label. I can't recall a need
> for your other idiom.
> -Rob
>
--
Kris Buelens,
IBM Belgium, VM customer support
