In a recent note, john gilmore said:
> Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 18:04:23 +0000
>
> About '-attr', my earlier point was that this UNIX syntax, whatever its
> merits in its original home, is without merit in Binder control statements,
> which until its introduction had a very different, coherent syntax.
>
On that, we readily agreed in:
Linkname: Re: stable entry points in rebound modules
URL:
http://listserv.uga.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0407&L=asm370&D=1&O=D&X=71DC0A15CC83077DDC&[EMAIL
PROTECTED]&P=14993
... where you suggested:
If this facility is needed---I'm not sure it is---why not
introduce the new statement
| ATTRIBUTES ddname(member)
But you said earlier, in:
Linkname: Re: load module editor
URL:
http://bama.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0401&L=ibm-main&D=1&O=D&P=212825
the binder behavior [not replicating attributes] he [PG]
describes is not in my view broken or, if 'broken' cannot
at all readily and in my view should not be 'fixed'.
[ ... ]
Let me make my point in even more brutal language: the naif
use of the binder as a black box is and will I hope remain
problematic. Its workings must be mastered, but once they
are mastered it is a very useful tool indeed.
(registration required for each link).
Alas, I believe IEBCOPY needs to be able to use the Binder
as a "black box".
-- gil
--
StorageTek
INFORMATION made POWERFUL
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
