On Sun, 9 Dec 2018, at 01:47, Gene Heskett wrote: > On Saturday 08 December 2018 17:53:01 Jeremy Nicoll wrote: > [...] > > The pid was there so that when writing and testing the script > > I could tell which was which in taskmanager, which saw them > > all as the same thing - an instance of the script language's > > interpreter being run. > > > I can see where that could, if you "got your head" around it, be pretty > handy. But half or more of my gcode mistakes are typu's. And the rs274D > interpretor is very VERY good at recommending you learn to type. ;-)
In the music typesetting thing, one of the BIG problems was that a sequence of things done via its GUI (obviously) changed the file, but apart from my errors, bugs in the software meant that a session reloaded from a previously-saved file didn't always behave as the edit session where one had made the changes behaved. I haven't used it for a while but I'm sorely tempted to learn how to use another system [Philip Hazel (of Exim & PCRE)'s PMW], where plain text files are interpreted to create PostScript scores. I think that the non- GUI approach suits me better. > > The script is written in ooREXX > Back when we did most of our scripting on amiga's, ARexx was the language > to top all the rest... Most of my REXX was written on MVS (now z/OS) systems and was what's commonly called 'Classic REXX', somewhat predating even ANSI REXX. On a PC, I use ooREXX but nearly none of its oo capabilities - one can write code that's very similar to Classic non-oo REXX. > Computers are to reduce one's work, not multiply it times 15. Call me > lazy, but it "works for me".. I'm no longer wholly enthusiastic about learning completely new things (because of chronic illness) but I keep meaning to try to get to grips with Linux... which is why I lurk here. If and when I do, I expect to keep using ooREXX. -- Jeremy Nicoll - my opinions are my own.