As I recall, at the time IBM announced MVS-OE, there were significant difference between IEEE's POSIX and X.OPEN's standard. The names have changed since then, and the standards have converged.
They originally wrote Unix for ASCII, which doesn't have a new line character. Unix, and C, used a line feed as a logical new line, but I don't know what The Open Group or IEEE say about that. OMVS uses an EBCDIC NL character for the purpose. Linux uses an ASCII LF, even Linux on z. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Steve Thompson [ste...@copper.net] Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2021 3:05 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Coding for the future The diff between Posix compliant and not? Linux is Not Unix. zOS, iirc is by being Posix compliant. Sent from my iPhone — small keyboarf, fat fungrs, stupd spell manglr. Expct mistaks > On Jun 27, 2021, at 1:55 PM, Seymour J Metz <sme...@gmu.edu> wrote: > > Yes, but the original code inserted a blank between the two strings; It's > the difference between continuing "'foo bar'" and continuing "'foo bar '". > > Linux on z and z/OS Unix System Services both run on an IBM mainframe but > they don't use the same line end convention. > > What if I want the code to run on multiple platforms? That's an example of > why magic numbers are bad. > > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > > ________________________________________ > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of > Charles Mills [charl...@mcn.org] > Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2021 1:45 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Coding for the future > > Right, it makes it into (effectively) on long "continued" (if you will) > literal. Effectively, not literally. > > I was assuming the IBM mainframe as this is the IBMMAIN mailing list. And my > point is not the value x'0a' but rather the technique. Substitute whatever > magic number is a linefeed on your platform. > > Charles > > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On > Behalf Of Seymour J Metz > Sent: Saturday, June 26, 2021 8:22 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Coding for the future > > That '||' changes the semantic; the is no longer an implied blank between > the two literals. > > Using the magic number 0A will break the code on any platform that doesn't > follow C/Unix the convention of LF for new line. > > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > > ________________________________________ > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of > Charles Mills [charl...@mcn.org] > Sent: Friday, June 25, 2021 7:57 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Coding for the future > > Flogging this terminally ill equine late in the game, but gosh, relative to > #1, it is not a literal (ha ha) answer but does it not solve the problem? > > Foo = "blah blah" || , > "blah blah" > > I would think that MFC would have preferred that to "ugly." > > And regarding #2, similarly > > Bar = "blah blah" || X2C("0A") || "blah blah" > > Charles > > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On > Behalf Of Seymour J Metz > Sent: Friday, June 25, 2021 4:32 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Coding for the future > > I can see him agreeing that an expression involving two distinct strings is > not what he meant; that tells me nothing about what he did mean. > Specifically, it does not tell me whether he meant: > > 1. A string literal running over two source lines > whose value does not include an embedded new line. > > 2. A string literal whose value includes an embedded new line > > With either meaning, " I wish Rexx supported multi-line strings." remains a > reasnoable desire, in the sense that REXX does not currently support it. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
