> I hate EBCDIC issue, it's a multiple code page set issue!. Pop quiz: when > using REXX on a PC, is ¬ 'AA'X or 'AC'X? And, yes, you can cheat and use \ > so you don't have to care which code page and which interpreter, but why > should you have to? And what if you want to download exist REXX code from, > e.g., z/OS, zVM?
-- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Paul Gilmartin [0000000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu] Sent: Friday, May 28, 2021 7:50 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: ISPF Edit Macro Regular Expression (This thread would better go on ISPF-L.) On Fri, 28 May 2021 13:27:23 -0400, David Spiegel wrote: > >I'm trying to write a Rexx ISPF Edit Macro which contains a FIND Regular >Expression. > ... >I turned HEX ON so that my square brackets can be displayed. (I used >x'AD' and x'BD'). > This sucks! Metacharacters in macros are interpreted according to the CCSID of the attached terminal; 1047 if in background. It implies that the author of a macro must publish a variant for each supported terminal type and thee user must adjust SYSEXEC for the terminal in use. Does any IBM representative care to defend this design? Better there should be a PRAGMA CCSID command to specify the interpretation of metacharacters. Better still, the macro should be loaded from zFS tagged with CCSID. Even 1208. I hate EBCDIC! -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
