In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 04/21/2008 at 11:15 AM, Paul Gilmartin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>Every well-designed language, application, programming system should have >a way to force an error. IDCAMS has such; HLASM has MNOTE; zSeries has >x'00'. No; a program check with PIC 1 might not be an error, and I've seen code that uses it as a normal event. >Rexx lacks such; Are you a betting man? >I resort to dividing by zero >or accessing an uninitialized variable to force an error. Aren't you contradicting yourself? If you've discovered two ways to force an error then there is a way. BTW, why not use SIGNAL? >As a courtesy, the vendor should partition the name space and commit to >leaving some fraction available for user-defined macros and promising >that no new OP code or macro will intrude on the space ceded to users. I'd like that. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html> We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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