On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 14:54:45 -0500, Paul Gilmartin <paulgboul...@aim.com> wrote:
>... >>PARM='PARMX',PARMX='WAAAAAY LONGER THAN 100 CHARACTERS'. >... >I'd be quite satisfied with this _provided_ it was compatible >with the existing CALL, LINK, ATTACH, etc. argument lists. >... > >(And that symbol substitution would work within PARMX.) >... My vote doesn't count any more (as if it ever did!) but I can guarantee that whether you want this parm substitution to take place at Reader/Interpreter time, conversion time, or execution, I want one of the others. The world just works that way. >But how would this facilitate implementation? I'm sure this is not why Rob suggested PARMX, but his suggestion would facilitate the creation of PARMR (for R/I substitution), PARMC (for Converter substitution), and PARMX (for execution substitution). I'm certainly not implying there is a way to allow that implementation to happen; just saying that there must be a way to pick or some people will be unhappy (as compared to the current situation where everybody is unhappy). Pat O'Keefe ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
